Delaware comprehensive outdoor recreation plan

[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

-- - - - - - - - - ---------
L L H,

't;, g

I Q I

"its, W@,@4

"Vz

uc,

GV
191.42
D3
D34
1970

... .... .

MAY 16 1974

Delaware
Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation
Plan

Delaware State Planning Office
Thomas Collins Building
530 S. duPont Highway
Dover, Delaware 19901

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NOAA
COASTAL SERVICES CENTER
2234 SOUTH HOBSON AVENUE
CHARLESTON , SC 29405-2413

October, 1970

The preparation of this plan was financed in part through a grant from
the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation, Department of the Interior, under the
provisions of the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1964. The
remainder was financed by state funds.

Property of CSC Library

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors wish to acknowledge the assistance of the many individuals and organizations
who assisted with this project. It is impossible to name them all. Special acknowledgement is
given to the staff members of the State Planning Office for their contributions to this project
and for reacting to proposals and reviewing drafts, to the secretaries for typing the numerous
drafts, and to the draftsmen for preparing and revising the many maps and plans. Special
acknowledgement is also given to the following:

State Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control

Fish and Wildlife Division
Parks, Recreation and Forestry Division
Environmental Control Division
Soil Conservation Division

State Division of Archives and Cultural Affairs

State Division of Highways

U.S. Soil Conservation Service

Bureau of Outdoor Recreation, Regional Office, Philadelphia

Planning Department, City of Wilmington

New Castle County Planning Department

New Castle County Parks Department

Kent County Planning Department

Sussex County Planning Department

The interest and assistance of these individuals and agencies during the course of this study
was especially appreciated.

D.S.H.
M. K. B.
J.C.W.

DELAWARE STATE PLANNING 0FFICE

THOMAS COLLINS BUILDING

DOVER DELAWARE 19901
David R. Keifer
DIRECTOR
November 1, 1970

The Honorable Russell W. Peterson
Governor of the State of Delaware
Legislative Hall
Dover, Delaware 19901

Dear Governor Peterson:

It gives me great pleasure to submit to you the Delaware Comprehensive
Outdoor Recreation Plan. This report is the product of an on-going
planning program which evaluates the supply and demand for outdoor
recreation resources in Delaware and developes a program and plan of
action to facilitate development and preservation of our outdoor
recreation areas and natural resources.

This official outdoor recreation plan for Delaware, when approved by
the Secretary of the Interior, will qualify our State for full partic-
ipation in the Federal Land and Water Conservation Fund administered
by the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation.

Sincerely,

David R. Keifer
Director

DRK/fb

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
I ntroduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Recreation Planning In Delaware . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Responsibilities for Outdoor Recreation Planning . . . . . . . . . 8
Goals and Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Delaware's Outdoor Recreation Potential . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Natural Features . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Economy and Growth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Inventory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Federal Control . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . 23
State Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
County and Municipal Ownership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
Private Recreation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
Demand . . . . . . . . . . 54
Factors Influencing Dema`nd . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
Determination of Socio-Economic Variables and
Participation . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
User Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
Projected Demand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
Potential Demand, Calculation of User Days . . . . . . . . . . 74
Socio-Economic Adjustments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
Existing Recreation Capacities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
Total Projected Need by Activity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
Outdoor Recreation Needs, Deficiencies . . . . . . . . . . . . 99

Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105

Quality Aspects of Outdoor Recreation . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
An Open Space System .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
Special Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
Floodplains, Wetlands and the Shore . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
Pollution, Waste Disposal and Related Problems . . . . . . . . . 119
Recreation Needs of Urban Residents . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
Loss of Private Recreation Lands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
The Handicapped . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
Watershed Drainage Projects and Recreation Potentials . . . . . . 126
Land Assembly and Protection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
Local Governments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Delaware Outdoor Recreation Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133

Policies for Outdoor Recreation . . . . . . 135
The Delaware Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan . . . . . . . 139
The State's Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142
Wildlife Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142
Impounded Waters, Water Accesses and Related Facilities . . . . . 149
Forest Preservations and Other Woodlands . . . . . . . . . . 154
State Parks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156
Historic and Prehistoric Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166
Long Range Conservation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167
Re-Assessment of Present Ownerships . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168
The Impact of the State's Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170
Federal Lands and Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171
Local Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173
Private Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177
Implementation Techniques . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179
Sources of Funds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185

Action Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189

State of Delaware . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191
Local Governments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216
Federal Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223
Plan Maintenance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 224

Appendices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225

Selected Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227
Legal Authority . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 231
Designation of State Liaison Officer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-14

LIST OF TABLES Page

1. Land and Water Conservation Fund Projects . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2. Areas Administered by the Division of Archives and
Cultural Affairs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
3. State Forests Areas, Facilities and Activities . . . . . . . . . . . 34
4. Outdoor Recreation Areas Under the Jurisdiction of the Division
of Parks, Recreation and Forestry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
5. Outdoor Recreation Areas Under the Jurisdiction of the Division
of Fish and Wildlife . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
6. State Owned Lands Available for Outdoor Recreation . . . . . . . 42
7. Outdoor Recreation Areas Under Jurisdiction of the New Castle
County Parks and Recreation Commission . . . . . . . . . . . 43
8. Municipally Controlled Outdoor Recreation Areas,
New Castle County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
9. Municipally Controlled Outdoor Recreation Areas,
Kent County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
10. Municipally Controlled Outdoor Recreation Areas,
Sussex County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
11., Private Outdoor Recreation Areas, New Castle County . . . . . . . 49
12. Private Outdoor Recreation Areas, Kent County . . . . . . . . . . 50
13. Private Outdoor Recreation Areas, Sussex County . . . . . . . . . 51
14. Summary of Present Outdoor Recreation Lands . . . . . . . . . . 53
15. Representative Growth Rates Study Area . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
16. Age of Head of Household as Percent of Total Population . . . . . . 56
17. Distribution of Delaware's Population by Age Group . . . . . . . . 58
18. Educational Attainment by Study Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
19. Median Years of Education Attained by County . . . ... . . . . . 60
20. Family Income of Study Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
21. Percent of Employed Labor Force by Occupational Category . . . . . 62
22. White, Blue Collar Workers as Percent of Total Population . . . . . . 62
23. Number and Percent of Households Participating by
Outdoor Recreation Activity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
24. Assumed and Projected Daily Recreation Visitors to Delaware . . . . 70
25. Projected User Days for Outdoor Recreation Activities, Year 1980 . . . 75
26. Projected User Days for Outdoor Recreation Activities, Year 2000 . . . 76
27. Net and Composite Effects Upon Selected Seasonal Days . . . . . . 81
28. Modified User Day Projections, 1980 and 2000 . . . . . . . . . . 82
29. Summary of Daily Capacities by Activity . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
30. Summary of Projected Needs by Activity . . . . . . . . . . .. . 97
31. Projected Daily Capacity Deficiencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
32. Urban Area Daily Capacity Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
33. Urban Outdoor Recreation Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
34. Proposed State Outdoor Recreation Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . 143
35. Local Recreational Inventory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174

LIST OF FIGURES Page

1 . Delaware and Megalopolis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2. Soils . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
3. Streams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
4. Forests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
5. Outdoor Recreation Areas Administered by the
Federal Government . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
6. Outdoor Recreation Areas Administered by the
Division of Archives and Cultural Affairs . . . . . . . . . . . 31
7. Outdoor Recreation Areas Administered as State Forests . . . . . . 33
8. State Parks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
9. Outdoor Recreation Areas Under the Jurisdiction of
the Division of Fish and Wildlife . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
10. Outdoor Recreation Areas Under the Jurisdiction of
the Division of Highways . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
11. Municipally Controlled Outdoor Recreation Areas . . . . . . . . . 48
12. Relationship of Age to Recreation Participation . . . . . . . . . . 57
13. Urban and Rural Residence, 1960 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
14. Per Capita Disposable Income, 1963 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
15. Motor Vehicle Registrations in Thousands . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
16. Leisure Time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
17. Percent of Households Participating in Various Outdoor
Recreation Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
18. Comparative Population Projections, Delaware . . . . . . . . . . 73
19. User Day Projections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
20. Delaware Open Space Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
21. Development Map, Rehoboth, Indian River and
Assawoman Bay Areas, 1938 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
22. Development Map, Rehoboth, Indian River and
Assawoman Bay Areas, 1969 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
23. Shellfish Closures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
24. Typical Drainage Project - Before Construction . . . . . . . . . . 127
25. Typical Drainage Project - After Construction . . . . . . . . . . . 128
26. Typical Drainage Project - Recreational Considerations . . . . . . . 130
27. Generalized Urban Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140
28. Community Development Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141
29. Proposed State Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144
30. Schematic Diagram of Life Cycle of Salt Water Fish . . . . . . . . 146
31. Multi Use Potential - Typical Wildlife Area . . . . . . . . . . . . 148
32. Potential Public Fishing Ponds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150
33. Typical Pond Complex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151
34. Typical Marine Access Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
35. Continuing Work Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197

LIST OF SCHEDULES

Page

1. State Acquisitio n FY 71 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201
2. State Acquisition FY 72 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202
3. State Acquisition FY 73 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203
4. State Acquisition FY 74 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204
5. State Acquisition FY 75 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205
6. State Acquisition FY 76 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 206
7. State Acquisition FY 76-80 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207
8. State Acquisition FY 80-2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208
9. State Development FY 71 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209
10. State Development FY 72 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210
11. State Development FY 73 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211
12. State Development FY 74 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212
13. State Development FY 75 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213
14. State Development FY 76 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 214
15. State Development FY 76-80 . . . . * " . . . . . . . . " ' ' 215
16. New Castle County, Acquisition FY 71 _76 . . . . . . . . . . . . 217
17. New Castle County, Development FY 71-76 . . . . . . . . . . . 218
18. New Castle County, Master Planning FY 71-76 . . . . . . . . . . 220
19. Wilmington, Development FY 71-76 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221
20. Dover, Acquisition FY 71-76 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 222
21. Dover, Development FY 71-76 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 222

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I INTRODUCTION
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I 1

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

PURPOSE

This Outdoor Recreation Plan was undertaken as part of an updating and expansion of the
initial plan, "Profiles and Plan: Outdoor Recreation in Delaware," State Planning Office, July,
1966.

This plan includes the findings of detailed inventory, demand and needs studies, as well as
considerably increased details regarding uses of existing property and potential acquisitions.

The plan and its supporting documents are also intended as a further detailing of the
Delaware Development Plan.

INTRODUCTION

The problem of what to do with leisure time and, in fact, the possession of leisure time, are
relatively new to man. Two generations ago most Americans lived in rural areas and toiled at
agrarian pursuits. Leisure was a rare reward for many hours of the hard labors of the
preindustrial society. Outdoor recreation as a part of leisure pursuits, when available, was no
problem. Opportunities for its enjoyment were just outside the front door.
As Perloff and Wingo have noted, however,11

"the metropolitan transformation of American civilization is the commanding factor in
the problem of outdoor recreation ... an expanding industrial society must, perforce, be
built upon cities, and as they have grown, and as the nation has taken on more and more
the spirit of urbanization, the needs for contact with the natural environment have
persisted, but the expansion of outdoor recreation opportunities has not kept pace.

This problem has crept upon us because as a nation we have been preoccupied with the
more urgent demands of the urban revolution: the need to overhaul and redistribute our
housing stock, to revamp our transportation systems, to develop new urban
institutions ... For two generations we have accumulated a backlog of recreation needs..."

This transformation from agrarian to urban character is easily noted in the northeast part of
the nation referred to as "megalopolis." It is also clearly noticeable in the Wilmington
Metropolitan Area which experienced a population increase of over 40 percent in the
1950-1960 decade and an estimated 35 percent increase to 1967. These increases are directly
comparable to growth rates in the surroun.&ng megalopolis.

The transformation, however, is barely visible in most of Kent County and in all of Sussex
County. Yet these areas contain the vast majority of Delaware's natural outdoor recreation
resources. As a result, these areas provide the outlet for frustrated recreational desires which are
not satisfied within the urban setting.

It is ironic that man has progressed so far in his industrial and technological development
that he now has abundant leisure time but has left few outlets for its enjoyment. Indeed, in an
intensified urban environment, if he still remembers the pleasure of the outdoors, he may well
find that the readily available outdoor recreational opportunity is frustrated by crowded

1 Perloff, Harvey S. and Lowdon Wingo, Jr., "Urban Growth and the Planning of Outdoor
Recreation," in Trends in American Living and Outdoor Recreation ORRRC Study Report 22,
Page 83.

highways and beaches, by streams and lakes that no longer are safe for swimming or no longer
support fish, by once rural roads that no longer give a glimpse of field or pasture, and by
wo ,odlands that vibrate under the thrust of machinery creating still more of the urbanization he
seeks to avoid.

That these opportunities still exist in the non-urban portion of the State reflects not so much
an interest in their preservation as a disinterest in urbanization. The fact that Delaware is rapidly
approaching the degree of urbanization noted in its metropolitan setting and the relative
shortage of available land within that setting requires foresight and action now if outdoor
recreation opportunities are to exist in the future.

Decreasing hours of work, earlier retirement, longer vacations, and increased mechanization
,at work and at home are all contributing to increasing demand. This increasing demand must be
accommodated in the most efficient manner, with the least destruction of our natural resources.
As the Governor of Delaware, the Honorable Russell W. Peterson, has noted in an address before
the Southern Governor's Task Force for Nuclear Power Policy:

"We at the State level of government must add a new dimension to our planning
activities .... Our ultimate goal is to build a better quality life for our citizens .... To
succeed, we must seek to protect and nourish our most vital treasure --@ the quality of
our environment."

The challenge is at hand. The demands are clear. The charge is to provide facilities for
outdoor recreation while guaranteeing the maximum protection of the environment. This plan
represents Delaware's program for meeting this challenge.

RECREATION PLANNING IN DELAWARE

In many respects, the history of recreation planning in Delaware can be assumed to begin
with the establishment of the individual natural resources agencies. In 1879 the Delaware Game
Protective Association, the forerunner of the present Division of Fish and Wildlife of the
Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control was authorized by the General
Assembly. A three-man Board of Game and Fish Commissioners was established in 1911 for the
purpose of protecting, conserving, and propagating wildlife in the State for recreational and
economical benefits. In 1944 the first State wildlife area was established at Petersburg by a
transfer from the federal government. Prior to 1913, the initiative for action rested with
sportsmen who sought assistance from the state legislature. From 1931 to 1949, wildlife
administration rested primarily with the political party in power which involved elected and
appointed officials. Since 1949, administration has been increasingly delegated to career
personnel with special formal training.

A State Parks Commission (now the Division of Parks, Recreation and Forestry) was created
in 1934 and empowered to preserve and to protect the scenic, scientific, historic, and wildlife
resources of the State and to make them available for public use.

Several parks were transferred from the Federal government to this Commission, but the first
acquisition was not made until July 26, 1951, when Brandywine Springs was purchased.

The Forestry Commission was organized in 1927 for the purpose of managing and
maintaining State Forests and making these lands available to the public for certain types of
outdoor recreation. This agency is now part of the Division of Parks,,Recreation and Forestry.

The concept of a published statement of the future direction of these agencies and their
acquisitions is quite recent. The "State of Delaware Intrastate Water Resources Survey,"
published in 1959, included sections on Delaware's natural resource agencies. It recognized that
the former Board of Game and Fish Commissioners must make every effort to preserve public
hunting and fishing areas and to more efficiently utilize the existing areas. The study pointed
out that plans for improving fish and wildlife resources should be included in any development
program.

The "Intrastate Water Resources Survey" estimated that 14,260 acres of State park land will
be needed in the year 2010 to accommodate Delaware's predicted population. Minimum
estimates were made of water and land requirements needed for fulfilling the State's
recreational obligation.

The study indicated the need for the former State Forestry Department to perpetuate and
improve all forest covered lands, and to expand and update forest survey data.

In May, 1958, studies were begun by the Welfare Council of Delaware, any agency devoted
to research and planning coordination for health, welfare, and recreation, in order to determine
the State's responsibility in the field of recreation. In March, 1962, cooperating state, county,
municipal and private outdoor recreation agencies submitted their studies to the Welfare
Council. A coordinated report was prepared which was unanimously adopted. The plan was
then reviewed and approved by the State Planning Council. In order to implement the plan,
legislation was introduced in the General Assembly which resulted in the passage of House Bill
388 during 1964. This Bill allocated $503,750 for the acquisition of land and water for local
park, recreation, and conservation uses. The Bill also provided $1,998,750 for State Parks and
$747,500 for Game and Fish acquisition purposes. Related legislation also provides for
safeguards in land selection and channels for approval, including approval by the State Planning
Office.

A progressive step in recreation planning was taken in 1965 with the passage of the Federal
Land and Water Conservation Act under which Delaware has received funds annually to plan
for, acquire, and develop recreation areas. Under this program, the Director of the Delaware
State Planning Office serves as the liaison between the State and the Bureau of Outdoor
Recreation, Department of the Interior. This program requires that a Comprehensive Outdoor
Recreation Plan be prepared to serve as a basis for funding acquisition and development
projects. Delaware's initial Outdoor Recreation Plan was prepared as part of the first
Comprehensive State Development Planning Project. This initial plan was approved by the
Bureau of Outdoor Recreation for a twenty-four month period, which expired in September,
1968.

In May, 1967, the Delaware State Planning Office prepared the "Procedural Guide: State
Financial Assistance for Local Open Space Acquisition," a publication designed to stimulate
interest in the land acquisition program for which funds were provided under House Bill 388.
This report also simplified the formal application procedure.

The "Preliminary Comprehensive Development Plan" for the State of Delaware, prepared by
the State Planning Office in June, 1967, contains a section on the Open Space Plan proposed by
the Delaware State Planning Office to guide the development of open spaces and to give
direction to urbanization. An _qpggi@_.syq@@M_Js !jescribed based UDon the presenxotiq[L of
__Rp.tn
stream valleys. Resource areas are included in the system as well as certain farm areas. Also in
'
JJGfi-e,_T5_67'- gn Outdoor Recreation Planning project was approved by the Bureau of Outdoor
Recreation for the State Planning Office. It is anticipated that this project, which is culminated
in this Outdoor Recreation Plan, will certify Delaware for recreation funds until 1975.

The State Planning Office published an "Outdoor Recreation for Delaware Inventory" in
August, 1968. This report was designed as an inventory of the areas and facilities, both public
and private, presently available in Delaware. Park and boat ramp user surveys were included to
indicate the trend in public opinions as to needed programs.

Further developments in recreation planning include a thirteen year plan for State Parks
prepared by the State Parks Commission. This program, known as "Project 80," is intended to
provide a State Parks program that will accelerate efforts to provide recreational areas and
preserve open spaces. Project 80 provides for land acquisition and development so as to fully
utilize the acquisitions and maintenance funds. Another recent action is the passage of the
Recreation Assistance Fund bill, discussed later in the -plan, which provides recreation
programming assistance to local governments and organizations.

As of July 1'r 1969, the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation had approved 39 acquisition or
development projects for the State. The areas, amount of grants, and approval dates are shown
in Table 1.

Additionally, recreation planning has been undertaken by New Castle County, the
culmination of which was the recreation portion of the New Castle County Comprehensive Plan,
presented in August, 1966. Further planning efforts have been made in local planning programs,
most notably those communities faced with critical urban pressures and dynamic growth. In.the
final analysis, however, the State has taken the initiative in outdoor recreation planning as well
as in acquisition and financial assistance to localities for establishing recreation planning and
action programs.

TABLE 1

LAND AND WATER CONSERVATION FUND PROJECTS

Sponsoring Approval Price Amount of
Agency Acres Title Date /Acre Federal Grant

01-P 433.0 Brandywine Creek State Park 12/1/66 $3,464 $ 750,000.00
02-F 137.6 McGinnes Pond and Access Acq. 12/20/66 728 50,250.00
03-P 550.7 Killens Pond State Park 7/22/67 915 251,515.00
4-F 15.8 Abbotts Pond and Access Acq. 4/3/67 516 4,125.00
6-F 8.0 Ingrams Pond Acq. (Mumford Tract) 4/20/67 1,000 4,000.00
7-F 1,220.0 Milford Neck Acq. 4/22/67 247 115,450.00
8-F 6.0 Andrews Lake Access Acq. 4/20/67 3,521 10,562.50
9-F 18.0 Portsville Access Acq. 4/3/67 278 2,500.00
10-F 225.9 Woodland Beach (Hampson) 4/3/67 97 11,000.00
11-F 2.3 Woodland Beach (James) 4/3/67 6,739 7,750.00
12-F 3.3 Tussock Pond Access Acq. 5/23/67 300 495.00
13-F 389.1 Little Creek (Haas) 5/25/67 170 33,000.00
14-F 464.0 Blackiston Area (Pratt) Acq. 6/1/67 237 55,000.00
15-F 267.1 Little Creek (Fair Haven) Acq. 6/1/67 195 26,000.00
16-F 959.0 Blackiston (Cassidy, Hargreaves
and Smith) 6/2/67 211 101,250.00
17-F 44.0 Little Creek (Port Mahon) 5/23/67 86 1,895.50
19-N Delcastle Recreation Area 12/29/67 200,000.00
20-F 212.5 Petersburg-Wright Acq. 12/19/67 167 17,750.00
2 1-P 24.3 White Clay Creek State Park
(Smith Property) 1/19/68 41,000.00
23-MH Development of Outdoor Recreation
Hospital for the Mentally Retarded 5/22/68 5,950.00
24-MH Development for Outdoor Recreation
Delaware State Hospital 5/16/68 11,179.00
25-F 41.1 Petersburg-R ash Acq. 7/25/68 200 4,116.70
26-F 379.0 Petersburg-Chipman-M inner Tract 8/15/68 150 28,425.00
27-P 12.4 White Clay Creek State Park
(Mabel 1. Thompson Property) 1/19/69 4,032 25,000.00
28-F 555.0 Augustine Beach-Silver Run Tract 2/12/69 378 105,000.00
29-F 12.6 Duck Creek Impoundment Access
Area 1/10/69 1,083 6,825.00
30-P 17.8 White Clay Creek State Park
(Ragan Property) 1/29/69 3,097 27,562.00
31-F 154.0 Milford Neck Area (Jester Property) 2/5/69 146 11,250.00
32-P 72.3 White Clay Creek State Park
(Walter J. Wells Property) 3/27/69 6,224 225,000.00
33-P 78.3 Lums Pond State Park
(Norman C. Allcorn Property) 1,328 52,002.20
34-F 73.0 Waples Pond Acq. 5/8/69 274 10,000.00
35-F 1.0 Abbotts Pond Access Site
(Watson Tract) 4/29/69 1,000 500.00
36-F 7.7 Haven Lake Access Site (Evans Tract) 5/8/69 2,597 10,000.00
37-F 750.0 Nanticoke Area Acq. (Henry Tract) 7/1/69 133 50,000.00
40-P 95.0 White Clay Creek (Vannoy Prop.) 1/13/70 4,316 205,000.00
41-P 53.9 White Clay Creek (Maxwell Prop.) 1/13/70 138,150.00
42-P 150.0 Lums Pond (Ford and Cann Prop.) 1/13/70 1,800 135,000.00
43-F 143.0 Petersburg (Liebel Tract) 7/1/69 175 12,500.00
44-F 737.0 Nanticoke (Hastings Prop.) 4/10/70 257 94,850.00

Total $2,849,000.70

Agency Code: P Division of Parks Recreation and Forestry
F Fish and Wildlife
N New Castle County
MH Division of Mental Health

RESPONSIBIL11TIES FOR OUTDOOR RECREATION PLANN ING

In the final analysis the responsibility for outdoor recreation planning, like all other
governmental functions, must be vested in the people as their hopes, their needs, their
preferences, and their money must be manifested through the machinery of government before
the effort may begin. Once these basic inputs are made, however, the responsibility for assuring
that adequate amounts of open space and facilities are available to meet the present and long
range needs lies primarily with the state, local, and federal governments.

Traditionally, various levels of government have exercised their respective powers in the
interest of the public welfare on the basis that this action is justified by a contribution to the
individual's social, physical, educational, and cultural well-being. Increasingly, however, this role
is being expanded in recognition of the future need, not only for man's existence but also for
his pleasure. Fortunately, the provision of the facilities which add pleasure to life can generally
be combined with those which protect such natural resources as forests, water courses, wildlife,
and essential minerals.

Outdoor recreation becomes primarily a responsibility of government in order that
recreation needs may be met in a manner complementary to the protection of natural resources
and with an eye to the future needs.

These responsibilities must be delegated among the levels of government in order that
maximum efficiency in meeting the need may occur. The demands on each level and the ability
to meet the total range of demands is significantly different at each level.

The State of Delaware

The Delaware Code provides for the delegation of legal responsibilities under a general
category of Conservation (Title 7, Delaware Code annotated, 1953, as amended). The powers
and duties formulated under this title include: the protection, conservation, and propagation of
fish and wildlife; the control and direction of the shellfish industry and the protection of
shellfish; and protection and administration of forests and woodlands.

Title 7 also provides for: agricultural conservation; establishment of soil conservation
districts and programs; drainage of land and creation of tax ditches; and the possession, use,'and
disposal of public lands. This title further includes the creation of state parks; the expenditure
of funds for acquisition, development, and maintenance of lands suitable for recreation; and the
making of plans, regulations, and agreements for the administration of recreational facilities.
Finally, Title 7 contains provisions for the establishment and maintenance of certain memorials,
the'protection of archaeological sites, and the study and administration of the State's geological
resou rces.

Another Title, Number 29, provides for a Public Archives Commission (Chapter 33) charged
with responsibilities for the preservation and recording of historic documents, marking of
historic points of interest, and the selection, acquisition, repair, restoration, and'adm in ist ration
of historic buildings, sites, or objects worthy of such preservation. This title also provides for
maintenance of a State Museum under the Public Archives Commission.

Additional legislation has provided appropriations for acquisition of lands for park,
recreational, and conservation purposes (7, Section 5801) encouraged the creation on private
land of public recreational facilities (7, Section 5901), and has designated the State Planning
Office to review all outdoor recreation land acquisitions for the State of Delaware for
compliance with the Delaware Comprehensive Plan.

This legislation, while establishing duties and powers in a broad sense, has not delineated the
characteristics of the responsibilities as related to those at other levels. Therefore, the following
state-oriented characteristics should be identified.

First, the State's outdoor recreation system is largely resource based. The primary role of
State facilities should be to provide outdoor recreation experiences for Delaware citizens and
visitors in a nature-centered setting. These facilities should provide a variety of recreational
facilities and accommodations for recreational pursuits and enjoyment of scenic and historic
areas.

Second, because of the resource orientation, the facilities of the State should be relatively
large in size, but much less intensely developed than those at a more local level. The State
should honor its official charge of preserving and protecting the recreational and environmental
resources rather than attempting to provide highly developed facilities which too often provide
no relief from the urban frame of reference of most of their users. Nevertheless, these areas and
the uses therein may be as active I y-oriented as local facilities but with different facilities and a
greater emphasis on the natural setting.

Third, State parks and outdoor recreation facilities should resolve problems related to
resource preservation and use which supercede local jurisdictional boundaries. Hence, the State
has the partial, if not total, responsibility for resources which are split by natural features, such
as a water area or ridge line, and which are also local jurisdictional boundaries. This
responsibility should--at least--be for coordination of efforts, at the local level, if not for actual
acquisition and development.

Therefore, the State has the responsibility of providing large scale facilities which are neither
of a national concern or a local concern. Such State facilities, designed for meeting the needs of
a significant portion of the State's population, should provide multi-use recreational areas for
resource-oriented outdoor recreation activities, and should protect and encourage the
enjoyment of unique "scenic, historic, scientific, prehistoric, and wildlife resources of the
State."

Federal Government

A primary responsibility of the federal government is the maintenance of outdoor
recreational facilities and other open spaces which includes areas of national interest due to
their size, exceptional natural or historical character, or multi-jurisdictional value. Most of these
are not located with respect to potential users but rather are strictly resource location oriented.

The federal government's role is essentially that of land manager. Most of its agencies are
involved in the protection of forests, creation of refuges for migratory waterfowl,
administration of national monument areas, and protection of nationally or regionally
significant river basins and watersheds. In all of these, the need is such that it could not
adequately be met by the separate and combined actions of smaller jurisdictions.

Another role of the Federal government is broad based research of an environmental nature.
The results of such research has regional or national significance but also affects State and local
actions. An example of such a study is the North Atlantic Regional Study being conducted by
the Water Resources Council. The objectives of the North Atlantic Study are to develop and
document the information which decision-makers need to guide the ordinary and proper
development of the region's water and related land resources.

Counties and Municipalities

The actions of higher levels of government in meeting the outdoor recreation need do not
relieve the local jurisdiction of its responsibility to provide adequate, close-by facilities for its
citizens. These facilities are the most detailed part of a comprehensive outdoor recreation
system and are perhaps the most basic. Services such as playgrounds, playfields, and swimming
pools and the small urban parks are essentially a local responsibility. These services often must
involve organization and administration of recreational programs as well as merely providing the
facilities.

Services at this level of responsibility are user-oriented and must be related to the special
needs of relatively small units of people. They cannot be adequately provided by state or federal
governments which are not directly responsive at such a small scale.

In summary, the local levels of government should provide for the basic recreation needs of
their citizens. They should concentrate on a balanced system of facilities which are readily
available to all citizens near their homes. They should provide the active outdoor recreation
space and facilities no longer available to the urban dweller in his high density, congested,
intensively utilized environment.

The Public and Private Enterprise

As noted, the ultimate responsibility returns to the public. Their responsibility as citizens
requires that they make their desires known to their elected officials, that they support plans
and programs to meet the outdoor recreation need, and that they preserve and protect the
limited outdoor recreational resources.

Their other responsibility involves the private enterprise function. Business can help meet the
total outdoor recreational need in a variety of ways, ranging from the operation of subsidiary
services in facilities provided by a governmental body to provision of certain facilities
themselves. All of these, however require a commitment on the part of private enterprise to
exercise judgement so as not to defeat the public interest in pursuit of profit.

Private investment should be encouraged with the requirement that such outdoor recreation
development be in accordance with acceptable standards, make reasonable use of natural
resources, and be open to all citizens on an equal basis. Through properly designed and
responsibly operated recreation businesses, the public can receive the widest range of
recreational opportunities, the local and state economies can be significantly strengthened, and
the operator can realize both a profit and a sense of satisfaction in meeting a public need.

GOALS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE OUTDOOR RECREATION PLAN

The goals and objectives of this Outdoor Recreation Plan for Delaware are consistent with
the national objectives established by the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965
under which this was prepared. These broad goals include: increasing the nation's outdoor
recreation resources; preserving existing public outdoor recreation resources from encroachment
of incompatible uses; protecting, enhancing, and restoring the natural beauty and other
qualitative aspects of the total outdoor environment; and serving the outdoor recreation needs
of the increasing number of urban and metropolitan residents.

In accord with these broad guidelines and the needs of Delaware's residents and visitors, this
plan is dedicated to the goal of developing a comprehensive, orderly, efficient, and achievable
process for outdoor recreation planning, programming, and action for the residents and visitors
of the State of Delaware. Specific objectives of this plan are to:

1. Provide opportunities for physical and mental revitalization through the development of a
diversified system of outdoor recreation facilities.

This objective encompasses the policy of providing facilities for the satisfaction of active and
passive recreational needs of all residents and visitors of the State. It also provides for a
balanced, coordinated system of open spaces and active use areas to serve both the busy urban
centers and the State's rural and suburban areas. Finally, it includes the creation of green space
systems to enhance the value of nearby development, to connect the active elements of the
plan, and to protect the natural scenic beauty.

2. Prepare programs and plans for the preservation of irreplaceable natural resources.

This objective proposes the delineation of scenic vistas, valuable wetlands, significant stream
valleys, the State's bay and ocean shoreline, and other natural resources worthy of special
consideration in their own right, and the formulation of programs and techniques for their
preservation.

3. Develop programs and policies for the coordination of acquisition and development
efforts of all State agencies with those of other public and semi-public bodies engaged in
providing facilities for outdoor recreation, in fish and wildlife conservation, or in the
preservation of scenic, cultural, or historic resources.

Inherent in this objective is the need for coordination of efforts and funds in order that the
maximum benefit may accrue from the expenditure of public and private funds. It also implies
the full utilization of all applicable funding sources to which Delaware may be entitled in order
that the direct public burden may be minimized. Further, it suggests the need for studying the
role of each agency and its relationship to other agencies engaged in related activities.

4. Determine an appropriate level of State action vis-a-vis the role of private enterprise in the
provision of outdoor recreation facilities.

Strengthening the private economy is a primary objective of all governmental programs. This
statement recognizes that the State should limit its action to the provision of facilities and
services which it is best suited to provide as well as establish the role and the degree to which
private enterprise should be encouraged to help meet outdoor recreation needs.

5. Establish responsibility, evaluate potentials and constraints, delineate special problems,
propose programs and actions, and establish priorities for provision of outdoor recreation
facilities.

This objective embraces many concepts in what is essentially an abridged outline of the work
that follows. It includes the necessity of reviewing legal requirements of the various agencies,
evaluating their actual roles, and considering administrative and organizational structures in
regard to outdoor recreation. It also includes determining and proposing solutions to special
problems such as the recreation needs of the handicapped and underprivileged, and the
continuing loss of wetlands and urban open spaces. Furthermore, it includes the objective of
providing reviews and recommendations concerning the value of legal and other tools for land
development control, for preservation of natural resources, and for protection of fish and
wildlife. Finally, it proposes the determination of priorities in order that the most critical needs
can be met within the constraints imposed by financial factors, staff capabilities, and other
pressures on limited land and water resources.

These objectives outline a work program aimed at the creation of an outdoor recreation
system to serve as a guideline for State, county, local, and federal government; private
enterprise; and the activities of civic, service, and conservation groups throughout the State. The
outdoor recreation need, the limited natural resources, and the press of urbanization demand
that this effort be made and that its results be implemented.

I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I BACKGROUND
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

13
1

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

DELAWARE'S OUTDOOR RECREATION POTENTIAL

Delaware, second smallest of the 50 states, and part of a virtually level coastal plain,
possesses an outstanding array of outdoor recreation potential, and is subject to an equally
outstanding threat by virtue of its configuration and its metrpolitan location.

Delaware is located in the southern part of the north Atlantic metropolitan complex known
as megalopolis, It is bounded on the east by the Delaware River, Delaware Bay, and the Atlantic
Ocean; on the south and west by Maryland; and on the north by Pennsylvania. (See Figure 1).
The State has three counties with a total area of 2,057 square miles, including 79 square miles
of inland water. It is 96 miles in length and varies in breadth from nine miles in northern
Delaware to 35 miles in southern Delaware.

Within a day's driving time reside over 8,426,0002 persons in the highly urbanized centers of
Washington, D.C., Baltimore, Philadelphia and New York. Its peninsula location also makes it a
dead-end for travel to and participation in outdoor recreation activities - a location which places
large demands on its resources. These resources are influenced by the State's topography,
geology and soils, streams and other water areas, climate and woodlands.

NATURAL FEATURES

Topography

The highest point in Delaware is 442 feet above sea level. It is located in the Piedmont
Plateau, northwest (if Wilmington near the Del aware-Pennsylvania State Line.

The Fall Line is the division between the Piedmont Plateau and the Coastal Plain. The
mode rate-to-steep slopes and narrow stream valleys of the Piedmont end along this line. The
Fall Line crosses the northern part of the State from northeast to southwest, cutting through
Wilmington and Newark. Six percent of the land area of Delaware is located north of this line,
that is, in the Piedmont. The remainder of the State is located in the relatively level Coastal
Plain.

The low elevation and flat topography of the Coastal Plain limit the effectiveness of natural
drainage. Floods occur because entire watersheds receive direct precipitation at the same time.

Geology

As indicated above, Delaware is located in two geological subdivisions: the Appalachian
Piedmont Province and the Atlantic Coastal Plain Province. The Piedmont extends along the
eastern flank of the Appalachian Mountains from New Jersey to Alabama. The Atlantic Coastal
Plain of Delaware is a small emergent portion of a great mass of sedimentary rock known as the
Atlantic Continental Shelf, which stretches from Newfoundland to Florida.

The rocks of the Piedmont are very old, hard, and crystalline. Those of the Coastal Plain are
younger, largely unconsolidated sediments. A seaward extension of the ancient Piedmont rocks
forms a platform upon which the thick wedge of the Coastal Plain sediment is constructed. The
layers or beds of rock in the Coastal Plain are arranged like the shingles of a roof, overlapping
seaward so that the older units are exposed near the Piedmont and are buried under successively
younger rocks to the southeast. A layer of ice-age sand and gravel forms an almost complete
cover over this entire structure.

2 1960 U.S. Census of Population

FIGURE 1

ME.

N. H.

VT.

Boston

F
d
Of

NEW
YORK

4b
0R.7-A->

............
W ton

411 1,1.d

MARY@ :@AN
80 tima

Wash'i

DEL.

VA.
DELAWARE AND
Richm@
40 MEGALOPOLIS

URBAN AREAS, 1960

Soils

The soil classifications shown in Figure 2 generally reflect their suitability for urban
development. This suitability is a matter of drainage. The flatness of the coastal flood plains
impairs runoff in those soils with poor surface drainage. The soils with poor subsurface drainage
prohibit development where private on-site utilities are necessary.

Alluvial meadows, swamps and tidal marshes are shown in Figure 2 under the general
category of Marsh. These areas have little urban development potential without extensive filling,
an action generally detrimental to the objectives of this plan.

The soil classification for urban use additionally has a recreation resource value. By this
delineation two facts emerge: one, further development will largely be limited to the areas with
good drainage, hence, user-oriented recreation needs will tend to congregate here; and second,
rnany of the non-useable or marginal use lands (urban use) will be available for outdoor
recreation use where such use will be compatible with the natural geological characteristics.

Streams

As shown in Figure 3, Delaware has many small streams. There are numerous fresh water
ponds and three shallow bays, Drainage basins with headwaters lying out of the State are the
present and principal future sources of surface water in northern Delaware. Drainage basins with
flows mainly originating within the State and drainage basins that are contained entirely within
the State are of minor importance at the present time as a water supply source. Ground water
supplies the southern two Delaware counties.

The Delaware River, which receives practically all the surface and subsurface water drainage
of northern Delaware, is saline along the entire eastern boundary of the State.

The streams entering the Delaware River estuary are subject to cyclic tidal fluctuations.
During high tides saline water moves inland, contaminating shallow water acquifers in the
coastal areas.

The rivers, streams, ponds, and bays, while not useable for water supplies, present an
excellent opportunity for development of water-based recreational facilities.

Climate

The climate of Delaware is moderate due to the proximity of the large bodies of water
surrounding the Delmarva Peninsula. At Dover, the State Capital, the annual average January
temperature is about 36 degrees while the average July temperature is about 77 degrees with a
recorded maximum of 104 degrees and a minimum of eleven degrees below zero. The annual
rainfall at Dover is approximately 45 inches and the growing season averages about 188 days.

Forests

Much of Delaware is covered by forests. The locations and extent of these woodlands are
shown in Figure 4. Oak-hickory is the predominant forest type in Kent and New Castle
Counties. Loblolly or southern yellow pine is the predominant forest type in Sussex County.
The forests are an important natural resource serving as a means of recharging the ground water
supply and, in Sussex County, the basis of a significant wood products industry.

FIGURE 2
SOILS

POOR SURFACE DRAINAGE

MARSH AND
POOR SUBSURFACE DRAINAGE

0 2 1 a

SCALE IN MILES

FIGURE 3

STREAMS

KALE IN MILES

FIGURE 4

FORMS

0 2 4 6 a

SCAU IN MILeS

Additionally, these woodland resources have recreational value for hunting, camping,
picnicking, and numerous passive uses. Furthermore, they are important to the ecology of the
State. Many of the woodlands also have special significance due to their concentration, type of
tree, or virgin character.

ECONOMY AND GROWTH

Delaware was the Nation's fifth fastest growing state with a 40.3 percent increase in
population in the decade from 1950 to 1960. More than 68 percent of the State's population is
located in New Castle County.

The Wilmington area is one of the chief chemical manufacturing centers of the world. The
manufacture of transportation equipment has also become an important industry in northern
New Castle County. Agriculture is still an important industry in Delaware with nearly forty
percent of the State's supporting crops, concentrated in Sussex County, are by far the teading
farm enterprises.

In the decade' from 1950 to 1960, Delaware had a population growth of a magnitude that
was unprecedented in the history of the State. Population forecasts indicate that during the
current and the 1970 to 1980 decades Delaware's population increase will be much greater than
the population growth that occurred between 1950 and 1960.

This increase in population, coupled with rising personal income and increased leisure time,
will result in additional demand from outdoor recreation activities. Providing the necessary
facilities and programs to meet this large outdoor recreation demand is the overall goal of this
plan.

Early History of Delaware

Due to its prominent position in early American history, Delaware has many areas of cultural
and historical significance.

The Delaware coastline was explored in the sixteenth century by the Spanish and
Portuguese, but little is known of their early ventures. On August 28, 1609, Henry Hudson
entered the Delaware Bay.

The State was named by Captain Samuel Argall who visited the area in 1610 and named it
after his patron Lord De LaWarr, an early governor of the colony of Virginia.

Dutch traders who arrived in 1622 to trade with the Indians were the first settlers to live in
the area. A trading company under the leadership of Captain David Pieterssen de Vries
established the settlement of Zwaanendael near present day Lewes in 1631. Within a year of
their arrival, the colonists were massacred by the Indians. Little trace of the settlement was
found when ships returned to the area in 1632.

The first permanent settlement in the State was made in 1638 when a group of Swedes and
Finns under the leadership of Peter Minuit settled on the Christina R'iver on the site of present
day Wilmington. The Swedish settlements eventually extended from Cape Henlopen into
Pennsylvania.

In 1651, the Dutch under Governor Peter Stuyvesant built Fort Casimir, which was located
near what is now the City of New Castle. Four years later Stuyvesant captured the Swedish forts
and Fort Casimir, which had been seized by the Swedes, thus establishing Dutch control of
Delaware and ending the Swedish colonial enterprise.

As Fort Casimir was not large enough to accommodate all the settlers, the town of New
Amstel was founded. The colony made great progress which included a vigorous fur trade with
the Indians and the re-establishment of a trading post near the ill-fated Zwaanendael settlement.
Agriculture was encouraged, along with the digging of canals and diking of marshes.

The government was the dictatorial military governship of the period, exercising instructions
from the crown. Education was fostered by the clergy, who represented their own state church,
but were very tolerant of the Swedish Lutherans.

In 1664, as a result of the wars between England and the Netherlands, a British expedition
led by the Duke of York was sent against the Dutch colonies. A force under Sir Robert Carr
defeated the Dutch. The English renamed New Amstel, New Castle, and the river and bay were
named Delaware.

Although the Dutch were allowed to retain their lands, the Duke of York's laws and the
English legal system were introduced in the colony. In 1680, New Castle and Deale Counties
were divided to create St. Jones County.

Upon the request of William Penn, Charles 11 made Delaware a part of the Province of
Pennsylvania. On October 27, 1682, Penn landed at New Castle and held the first general
assembly in the colony. St. Jones County was renamed Kent County, and Deale was renamed
Sussex County.

The Delaware colonists generally opposed taxation by the British Parliament. With the
beginning of the Revolution, nearly 4,000 men from Delaware enlisted for service. In 1775,
look-outs were stationed at Lewes to watch for British ships entering the Bay. Only one
skirmish was fought on Delaware soil, at Cooch's Bridge, where the American flag was first
believed to be displayed in land battle.

The present boundaries of Delaware were not proclaimed until 1775. The next year,
Delaware declared itself free from the British Empire and established a state government
entirely separate from Pennsylvania. Delaware became the "First State" by virtue of being the
first state to adopt the Constitution on December 7, 1787.

One of the greatest aids to this State's recovery from the Revolution was the invention of
autornative flour milling machinery in 1785 by Oliver Evans of Newport, Delaware. During that
same year, the mills along the Brandywine Creek in Wilmington alone shipped 300,000 bushels
of flour. Further growth of the State was evident in the establishment of the duPont Power
Mills on the Brandywine in 1802, and the chartering of the Farmers Bank in 1807.

On December 7, 1799, the Maryland General Assembly authorized the Chesapeake and
Delaware Canal Company. After receiving Delaware's approval, the Canal Company was
organized in Wilmington on May 2, 1803. Work was begun on the Canal the following year. The
Canal opened for regular traffic in September, 1829, thus allowing inland shipping between
Wilmington and the economic centers of the east coast.

Boundary disputes had continued between Delaware and New Jersey since the colonial
period. The case was settled by the Honorable John Sergeant, a Federal arbitrator. On January
15, 1848, his decision established the present eastern boundary of the State.

INVENTORY

This section is designed to be an inventory of the present supply of outdoor recreation
facilities and areas available in Delaware. The inventory provides an insight into the total
recreation resource picture and forms the base from which total needs are computed by
subtraction of the supply from the expected demand.

The inventory and surveys were conducted by personnel from the State Planning Office, the
former State Parks Department, with the cooperation of the various State, federal, and local
recreation and conservation agencies and with the cooperation of numerous private groups. The
inventory material is presented in the following order: Federal; State; Local; and Private
Recreational Facilities.

The inventory of the federally administered or maintained outdoor recreation areas has been
acquired through site surveys and from the federal agencies involved as of July, 1969.

The information on State-owned or operated outdoor recreation areas is based upon the
State Property Inventory, December, 1967, and an update to July 1, 1969, as maintained by the
Delaware State Planning Office and verified by the agencies involved.

'Each municipality was contacted to establish the amount of outdoor recreation area under
its jurisdiction and the predominant use of the area. This data reflects these areas as of July,
1969, while the private facilities portion of the data reflects the December, 1967, inventory.

INVENTORY OF PUBLIC AREAS USED FOR
OUTDOOR RECREATION UNDER FEDERAL CONTROL

The federal government has approximately 26,000 acres of Delaware land in this use (Figure
5). These lands are administered by either the Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers or
the Department of the Interior, Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, Fish and Wildlife
Services.

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Kilcohook Wildlife Refuge

As a result of the dredging operation to maintain a navigable water channel in the Delaware
River in 1934, a large mass (1,487 acres) known as Kilcohook Wildlife Refuge was formed on
the New Jersey side of the River. Though this area is physically attached to New Jersey, a court
ruling establishing the Delaware-New Jersey boundary rules Delaware's sovereignty extended to
the low water mark of the eastern shore of the Delaware River. This makes any fill area along
this boundary part of Delaware. While the refuge is of no value to Delaware residents as a
recreation area due to its location on the opposite side of the River, it does make available
breeding grounds for water fowl and small animals.

Bombay Hook National Wildlife Refuge

The Bombay Hook Refuge, established in 1937, is one of several stopping places located at
strategic points along the Atlantic Flyway from Canada to the Gulf of Mexico. It is situated
approximately eight miles northeast of Dover.

The Refuge is comprised of 16,280 acres, of which about 10,500 acres are tidal marshland.
The rest of the area includes 1,200 acres of impounded fresh water pools, brush and timbered
swamps, 1,000 acres of crop lands, and timbered grassy upland.

The recreational uses of the areas include nature study, photography, sightseeing, dog field
trials (two in the @all and one in the spring), and hunting on a limited basis, (3,000 acres on
which 12 blinds are erected and open for use three days per week for geese and archery type
deer hunting). Observation towers, nature trails, restrooms, picnic tables, and an information
booth are provided.

According to agency officials, there were 22,014 visitors to the Refuge during calendar year
1967. The bulk of the visitors (17,850) were recorded as general use while 4,164 were recorded
as hunters. A net loss of visitors over the past few years is partially attributed to the entrance
fee now being enforced at federal areas.

Primehook Wildlife Refuge

Primehook Wildlife Refuge, established in 1963 under a plan coordinated with local agencies
and interests, continues toward a proposed 10,000 acres to be completed in the next ten years.
(Presently 63% completed). Primehook Refuge will include a conservation education building,
nature study facilities and development to allow hiking, fishing, boat launching, picnicking,
hunting and dog field trials.

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS

Chesapeake and Delaware Canal

The Corps of Engineers is indirectly involved in outdoor recreation by virtue of having the
responsibility of maintaining waterway navigation channels such as the Chesapeake and
Delaware Canal. To accomplish this responsibility, it has been necessary to acquire additional
land to be used for the deposition of spoils on either side of the channel. Approximately 5,000
acres of land have been acquired for this use.

The hydraulic fill of these areas presents a hazard for a time after the operation is completed.
Subsoil conditions do not permit rapid leaching of liquids, allowing a hard crust to form over
the top which will not usually support a person's weight. Therefore, these fill areas are excluded
from public use until test borings indicate that conditions are safe.

In spite of the limitations and restrictions, the lands adjacent to the canal were visited by
some 32,000 people during 1967. Boating and fishing appear to be the most popular uses of the
canal, while the land provides hiking, picnicking, photography and sightseeing. As areas are
designated safe for public use, the Corps of Engineers licenses these areas to the Department of
Natural Resources and Environmental Control for the hunting of small game and for various
recreational uses. Such areas are open to the public with the same seasonal controls of any
public hunting ground. These activities in the winter months coupled with the summer activities
provide year round outdoor recreation facilities.

The Corps of Engineers is also responsible for establishing and maintaining the depths of
certain canals and channels comprising of, or accessory to, the Delaware segment of the "Inland
Waterway" and other heavily used or necessary inlets, bays and river courses. The areas listed
below are an integral segment of Delaware's outdoor recreation endeavor, as they allow for
maximum recreational boating opportunities.

Christina Rive, Project (Wilmington Harbor)

The Christina River project consists of nearly ten miles of channel in the River from the
Delaware River to Newport. The channel starts at a thirty-five foot depth and a four hundred
foot width at the Delaware River and gradually decreases to one hundred feet in width and a
seven foot depth at I\Jewport. (The width and depth is based upon the use and traffic.) At the
lower end where the Wilmington Harbor is serviced is the wider and deeper channel. Once past
the old pulp works (approximately the four mile mark) the channel decreases to one hundred
feet by seven feet. From this point upstream to Newport water oriented recreation uses
predominate.

St. Jones River

This seven foot channel from Delaware Bay to the landing at Dover was completed in 1933.
The stream provides crabbing, fishing, and passage for only small boats.

Waterway from Indian River Inlet to Rehoboth Bay

Because this water level is below one foot at low tide in both Indian River Bay and
Rehoboth Bay, a channel six feet deep and 100 feet wide is provided for passage of pleasure
boats. The channel is 2.7 miles long.

Beach Erosion Control Projects

Restoration and subsequent periodic nourishment of the beach lands have been instituted to
prevent further erosion.

This span of narrow beach, located between the Atlantic Ocean and Rehoboth Bay, provides
a needed recreation area for summer activities such as swimming, sunbathing and hiking. The
area is easily accessible by a highway running through the center of the peninsula.

Pepper Creek, Delaware

This six foot deep channel is a 3.9 mile branch of the Indian River Channel reaching into
Pepper Creek to Cattail Marsh. The project was completed in 1964.

Indian River Inlet

This channel from Indian River to Millsboro, Delaware, provides a 13 mile water passage
ranging in depth from 15 feet at the entrance to Indian River to four feet deep and 60 feet wide
at Millsboro. A turning basin nine feet deep, 175 feet wide, and 300 feet long is located at the
shallow end of the channel.

Fishing and boating are the most popular recreational activities.

PA. Figure 5
STATE OF DELAWARE

CLAI"
T Ll
--1
L EFO/N 7 E

Sm RE
ILMINGTON
Ew I i
NEWjRK OUTDOOR RECREATION AREAS IN DELAWARE
NEW@'
... A5TLE
UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

AND AREAS SERVICED BY FEDERAL AGENCIES

ELAWARE
CITY

A FEDERAL LANDS

ODE55A 1 . Kilcohook Wildlife Refuge
MID@LETCYIN
2. Bombay Hook Wildlife Refuge
3. Prime Hook Wildlife Refuge

TO-SEN
I
NEW CASTLE
COUNTY
B AREAS SERVED BY U.S. CORPS OF
CLAY- . I
SIMYRNA ENGINEERS

1 . Christiana River Project (Wilmington
I -T- Harbor)
2. St. Jones River Project
DOVER CLITTLE 3. Murderkill River Project
KrTLI 4. Broadkill River Project
1 5. Harbor of Refuge, Lewes, Delaware
KENT ...... A 6. Inland Waterway - Rehoboth to Lewes
2 7. Waterway - Indian River Inlet to Rehoboth
IAGIOLIA
COUNTY 3 8. Beach Erosion Control Project Bay
9. Pepper Creek Project
10. Indian River Inlet and Bay Project
@ARR INGTON M ORD C 11. Chesapeake and Delaware Canal
SLAUGITER

M.-

SUSSEX LEWES
BRIDGEVILLE 6
.Al- C
REHOBOTH

GEORGETOWN
COUNTY

SEAFORD

IILADE

MILLS

E DAG MILLVILLE AM
K*
P[T-Y
-c.
I .... FOR.

DEI_MAR SEL.- 'LLE 113
. . . . . . . .. . 1. .. . .. . .

Broadkill River Project

The project was initiated in 1874 to provide a channel from the Delaware Bay to Milton
along the course of the Broadkill River. The total length of the project is ten and one-half miles
with channel dimensions' of forty feet in width and six feet in depth. More recently the
entrance near Broadkill sound was abandoned and an entrance was made from the northern end
of the Lewes and Rehoboth Canal, thus utilizing Roosevelt Inlet. Primary uses of the channel
are fishing and recreational boating.

Harbor of Refuge, Delaware

The existing project, adopted in 1930 provides a breakwater 8,000 feet long. The breakwater
affords protection for pleasure boats from the rough seas and for the Cape May-Lewes Ferry
during its docking operations.

Rehoboth-Lewes Canal

The existing project, adopted in 1912 and modified in 1935 and 1945, provides for a
channel at least six feet deep and 50 feet wide. The total length of the channel is 12 miles.

The facility allows for the safe passage of pleasure boats from Rehoboth Bay by avoiding the
danger of open seas.

INVENTORY OF PUBLIC AREAS USED FOR OUTDOOR
RECREATION UNDER STATE CONTROL

STATE-OWNED LAND
Approximately 36,728 acres of State-owned land and water areas are available for outdoor
recreation and historical review. Five separate State agencies or divisions administer these lands.

Although some 36,728 acres of State-owned land and water are available for outdoor
recreation, many of the areas have controlled uses imposed upon them by the administering
agency. These restrictions are not intended to be deterrents to other types of recreation;
however, each land holding agency has a specific public function and must dedicate the primary
use of land to this function. In most cases as will be shown throughout the inventory report,
other non-conflicting recreation uses are allowed and often fostered. To better illustrate this
point, each of the landholding agencies listed is described as to its primary function, its land
holdings and the permissible uses.

HISTORIC AND PREHISTORIC RESOURCES

The Division of Archives and Cultural Affairs of the Department of State is charged with the
responsibility to preserve and maintain, for posterity, all matters of public record. Normally this
mandate would not, to a great extent, affect outdoor recreation; however, the law establishing
the former Archives Commission further states:

" . . . To prevent the further loss of part of our National heritage and culture through
the deterioration or neglect of historic buildings, sites or objects within this State, the
Public Archives Commission may survey, examine, select for preservation, acquire,
repair, restore, operate and make available for public visitation and use such historic
buildings, sites or objects as it may deem worthy of preservation in the best public
interest for the fulfillment of this subchapter . . . " I
This law still has significance for the action of the Division as regards the public utilization of
significant historic and cultural areas.

Under this section of the law, the Division of Archives and Cultural Affairs enters the field of
recreation. The Division administers 16 areas of national and/or statewide historical and
prehistoric importance. As seen in Table 3, Areas Administered by the Division and its
accompanying Figure 7, a few listed areas contain two items of historic importance. Also, there
are two cases where the land is not owned by the Division; however, leases or other legal
agreements have been established with the present owner (in each case another public body).

State Museum - Presbyterian Church

The official State Museum is located in Dover at the intersection of Governor's Avenue and
Bank Lane. The complex consists of four major buildings housing various artifacts significant to
the culture and development of Delaware. Two buildings were constructed and used by the
Presbyterian Synod, a church built in 1790, and a more recent parish house adjacent to it. The
other buildings on the site are the "Old City Gas Works" which now houses a Swedish-type

plank house and, the most recent structure containing the works of E. R. Johnson, an assistant
of Thomas Edison, the man who made "Victrola" a household word, through his marketing
ability.

Dickinsun Mansion

The home was built by Judge Samuel Dickinson in 1740, with additions in 1752 and 1754.
This was also the home of John Dickinson, son of Samuel, and generally known as the "Penman
of the Revolution." John Dickinson was an early President of Delaware and later also President
of Pennsylvania. In 1804, a fire badly damaged the house, but these scars are now being
removed by the replacing of paneling duplicating the original. This house is a Registered
National Historic Landmark.

Buena Vista

Buena Vista, named for the famous battle during the Mexican War, was built and occupied
by John Middleton Clayton in 1846-47. Clayton was Secretary of State under President Taylor.
Later the home was occupied by Clayton Douglass Buck, Governor of Delaware from 1929 to
1937 and U.S. Senator from 1943 to 1949. Recently his family gave Buena Vista to the State in
memory of their esteemed ancestors.

The Lindens

The Lindens is located at Duck Creek Crossroads, Kent County, a few hundred feet south of
the New Castle County Line. The home was built during 1765. Presently, the "Plank House,"
built about 1744, is located on the same two acre site. Nearby is the mill and mill pond, typical
of the early 1700's, The site will be an attempt at a revival of a small,'Colonial" community

The Plank House

The Plank House is located on the same two acre site as "The Lindens." The house was not
original to the site and was moved to it from the Smyrna vicinity.

Allee House

The Allee House is located in Bombay Hook National Wildlife Refuge Area, Kent County,
Delaware. The use of land around the Allee House has been obtained from the federal
government through a long-term lease. A few years ago the house was scheduled for demolition;
but, it was then found to be historically and architecturally valuable and the Archives
Commission interceded for its preservation.

Woodburn

Woodburn is the Governor's House. It was built in 1790, and is situated on part of an
original 3,000 acre plot which William Penn granted to John Hillyard in 1683. It is said the
house was the scene of one of the last slave-stealing raids by the notorious Patty Cannon.

Fort Christina Monument and Plank House

The "Monument" and "Plank House" are located at the eastern end of Seventh Street in
Wilmington, on the site of the first permanent settlement in Delaware and are Registered
National Historic Landmarks. The Monument is in recognition of the Swedish expedition under
the leadership of Peter Minuit, which landed at this site in 1638. The Plank House was originally
from the Price's. Corner area and moved to the Fort Christina site as an additional memento of
the early Swedish Colonists.

.,29

TABLE 2

AREAS ADMINISTERED BY THE DIVISION OF
ARCHIVES AND CULTURAL AFFAIRS

Area Under Significant
Historic Agency Construction
Site In Acres Date

The Lindens 1765
Plank House 2.0 1744 NOTES:
State Museum -
Presbyterian 1. In some cases exact dates of con-
Church 1.1 1790 struction are not available by record-
most accepted date is shown here.
John Dickinson
Mansion 18.3 1790 2. The monument erected in 1938 was to
commemorate the landing of the first
Fort Christina Swedes in 1638.
Monument 2 0.9 1938
Old Sussex 3. The land area is under Federal owner-
ship (Bombay Hook National Wildlife
County Courthouse 0.2 1793 Refuge) with a twenty year renewable
lease to the State of Delaware.
Fisher House
(White Meadow 4. Presently the Governor's House - Areas
Mansion) 0.5 1722 not used as living quarters are open to
Allee House 0.03 1750 the public.
5. Believed to be the oldest building in
Samuel Davies House 1708 the Delaware Valley.
Sign of the Buck
Tavern 5.0 1750 6. Land is owned by the Delaware State
Game and Fish Commission.
Buena Vista 51.9 1840's
4 7. Date is very indefinite but it is believed
Woodburn 1.7 1790 to be during the early 1880's.
Old Robinson House 1723 8. Acreage not available.
Early Swedish Block
House 5 1.2 1654 9. Major archeological find - estimated
Abbotts Mill 0.06 18807 to have been occupied in 700 A.D.
10. Includes 3.5 acres used for record
Octagonal storage.
School 8 1838

Lowber House .6 1774

Old New Castle
County Court House 2.8 1732

Island Field Site 9 5.0 700-1000

Total 94.810

PA. Figure 6
STATE OF DEL-AWARE

le TALL T-LE CLAY A
I
L4FONTE
A AA
SME E . /
. I " ILMINGTON
EWPO

A I N. ,J.
NEWIRK ... I NEW .1 OUTDOOR RECREATION AREAS ADMINISTERED
... ASTA
BY THE DIVISION OF ARCHIVES AND CULTURAL AFFAIRS

1. Old Robinson House and Early Swedish Block House

LAWARE
CITY 2. Fort Christina Monument

3. Old New Castle County Court House
H-1
4. Buena Vista

*ETO*N 5. Samuel Davies House and Sign of the Buck Tavern

6. The Lindens and Plank House

CASTLE 7. Allee House
co yy
8. Octagonal School

CLAY-
9. Woodburn
SMYRNA
7
10. State Museum Presbyterian Church

11. John Dickinson Mansion

DOVER CAKE. 12. Lowber House

13. Abbotts Mill
KENT
11 14, Old Sussex County Court House
AG-.. am"
COUNIn, 6 15. Fisher House (White Meadow Mansion)
...... -RCA 16. Island Field Site

MILFORD
HARRINGTON

A 3

SUSSEX

RIDIOSOTN

GEOWA70WN 14 "Hooo,
C"Ty

MEAFORD

DEL" LIVVILLK

The Division of Archives and Cultural Affairs is reviewing and studying other areas and
buildings of national and statewide significance in order to aid in the establishment of a
complete Historic Register.

Island Field Site

The Island Field Site is by far the largest and most signficant prehistoric cemetery ever found
on the Delaware peninsula. The site was first recognized as a site of Indian habitation during the
1930's, however, it was not until 1966 that full scale excavations were begun. In 1967 the full
significance of the site was realized and the State acquired the property in 1968. Almost 100
burials have been found to date along with substantial numbers of artifacts. Evidence indicates
that the site was occupied by two different groups at different times separated a period of no
apparent occupancy. The earlier occupancy is thought to have been by the people of the late
Middle Woodland Period culture during the period 700 - 1000 A.D. Temporary facilities are
now provided at the site for viewing of the burial grounds, however, more extensive
devel6pment of an educational and historic park, with related recreational facilities, has been
discussed.

STATE FORESTS

A correlation of Figure 7 the State Forest Areas, and Table 7 shows that over 6,300 acres
are under the administration of the State Division of Parks, Recreation and Forestry.

The purpose of the Division is to manage and maintain State Forests to the best advantage of
the State. The agency has been further advised to:

" . . . Set aside within the State Forests, unusual or historic groves of trees or natural
features particularly worthy of permanent preservation, and may make the same
accessible and convenient for public use, and may dedicate them in perpetuity to the
people of the State for recreation and enjoyment . . . - I

Also it is the policy of the Division to make available to the public, in any suitable manner,
these lands for certain types of outdoor recreation. It is for this reason Table 3 includes all State
Forests and the activities permitted in them.

Since a State Forestry Commission was not actively in existence until after the "Great
Conservation Movement," around the turn of the century, it is easy to see why the areas of
larger population and more intense development have less land available for this conservation
practice. For example, of the total 6,365 acres of State Forests shown in Table 3, and located
on Figure 7 74 percent are in Sussex County, 3 percent in Kent County and 23 percent in New
Castle County, the most densely populated county in Delaware. Presently the Division is doing
all in its power to further preserve this natural resource by expanding its holdings, especially at
the three larger tracts - Blackbird, Redden and Ellenclale - which are greatly fragmented due to
interior and contiguous exceptions.

Figure 7
PA. WARE
STATE OF DELA

CkAY

L4F NTE

Im, E ILMINGTON

Ewpo
'i N@ J.
EWjRK NEW .., OUTDOOR RECREATION AREAS ADMINISTERED AS
ASTLIE
STATE FORESTS

0__Ied Lion

Blackbird

EW CASTLE
COUNTY

Fire Tower

IT11

KENT
Fire Tower

11A

UNTY

MILF

Owens

Fire Tower

f
-1, 1... j
SUSSEX @fWES
6 _f-lendale
RENO)

GEoRGE" O:mN
SEAFORD COUNTY __aedden

Fire Tower

LL,

TABLE3

DELAWARE STATE FOREST AREAS, FACILITIES AND ACTIVITIES
PERMITTED AND AVAILABLE

ig
C .2
Area in C 12
0
.2 .2
Area Acres (L @E J: Co 0- U) u-

Blackbird 1,663 X X X X X 3
Red Lion 5 X X X 4 2
Redden 3,113 X X X X X 1 1
Owens 170 X. X X X X 3
Appenzeller 124 X X X X
Ellendale 1,223 X X X X X 5 1 1
Nursery 58 X
Fire Tower Areas 6 X X
Old Nursery 3

TOTAL 6,365 5 5 7 5 8 16 2 3

The land is managed primarily as a timber and pulp producing crop land. Much of the
acreage is reforested cut-over woodland which has been brought under State ownership and
restored to a meaningful production rotation.

The forests are open to the public for hunting, fishing, hiking, horseback riding and
picnicking. Limited picnic tables and related facilities are available in several areas.

STATE PARKS

The Division of Parks, Recreation and Forestry operates ten recreational facilities including
two facilities which are classified as recreation areas and eight which are classified as parks. As
shown in Figure 8, five of these facilities are located in New Castle County, one is located in
Kent County, and four are located in Sussex County. The facilities must provide activities for
persons interested in all types of recreation, thus making the task even harder. It must study and
analyze the desires of the people, then project these needs and develop a realistic development
plan which will satisfy both passive and active recreation enthusiasts.

Because of the complexity and yet singularity of activities and development facilities at each
State Park, a further description of each is desirable to complete an inventory of these, the
intensively developed and/or used outdoor recreation areas. This description will be provided in
the plan section of this document.

PA. Figure 8
-I- STATE OF DELAWARE
\y-A."', mp
I ALL If, I CLAY

A LEF(NTE -.1.
s
MERE /
EW.PO ILMINGTON
A. ..111 .; J N. J.
NEWIRK -11 10 A N ME
-1.- ASTLIE

ELAWARE
CITY

-.1 @ A. STATE PARKS UNDER THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE
PARKS, RECREATION, AND FORES T DIVISION

1. Brandywine Creek
om-
MID@LETOWN 2. White Clay Creek
3. Fort Delaware
A. 4. Lums Pond
T. 5. Killen Pond
EW CASTLE 6. Cape Henlopen
COUNTY 7. Delaware Seashore
13. Holts Landing
YRN& 9. Trap Pond
10. Brandywine Springs

DOVER LITTLE
CREEK

KENT WY0111G 'p-

0 AIL- -11 MAGNOL11 DO.-

COUNTY

FFLTDN FREDERICA

HARRINGTON MILFORD
-GITER
I BE-

'IL -C.

--ALE

LEWES
A SUSSEX 6
D11L I I'LL BRIDGEVILLE
J-
1.-
REHO60TH

I GEORGETOWN KHOICII.. -
COUNTY Ar
7
SEAFORD

-fl.Al IA.
.11L 8
E ILL-LE A.
Q.
PETKANY
K.CN

SELIMLLE

TABLE4

OUTDOOR RECREATION AREAS AND PERMITTED
ACTIVITIES UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF THE DIVISION OF PARKS,
RECREATION AND FORESTRY

Activities Permitted Present Facilities

cr
_1Z (U
.C S U W
ca CU =
0
-.1eEcn-a(nWQ)=0.
E S 0
0 Z -6 4@
M = M
Acres Parcels U) M U-
Facility U- d: U) Cn

White Clay
Creek 126.8 1 X X X
Brandywipe-
Creek 433.5 1 X X X X X 6
Brandywine
Springs 57.9 1 X X X x 101 2 15
Fort Delaware 161.4 2 X X X X X 18 5
Lums Pond 512.3 1 X X X X X X 110 2 32
Killens Pond 561.4 1 X X X X X X 18
Cape Henlopen 1,641.2 2 X X X X X x 210 39
Delaware
Seashore 1,759.4 3 X X X X X X 41 1
Holts Landing 33.0 1 X X X X X X 14
Trap Pond 965.3 1 X X X X X x 320 37

Total 6,252.2

FISH AND WILDLIFE AREAS

The Delaware Division of Fish and Wildlife administers approximately 18,700 acres of land.
Table 5, in correlation with Figure 9, depicts these areas, their location, size and permitted
recreation use by rank.

The Fish and Wildlife Division provides public hunting and fishing areas for all interested
persons. Presently, the Division has 18,700 acres under its jurisdiction. However, the Division
realizes that its present holdings are inadequate and continues a policy established a few years
ago to acquire:

1. as many mill ponds as feasible - 20 by 1974
2. a minimum of 4,000 acres of additional wetland
3. a minimum of 7,1100 acres of upland
4. additional access land at ponds sites

Figure 9 shows that the majority of the Commission's holdings are in the southern two
counties, Kent and Sussex.

PA.
W - Figure 9
TLE CLAIK `
STATE OF DELAWARE
LEFeNTE
TA
SMERE I
LMINGTON
Ew PC,

IT N. J.
NEWIRK NEW.'
ASTL+ OUTDOOR RECREATION AREAS UNDER
A11
Ae ADMINISTRATION OF THE FISH AND WILDLIFE DIVISION

A.A. Access Area
ELAWARE'A,
2 1 CITY Legend W.A. WildlifeArea
Ax
1 Becks Pond*
2 Lums Pond
3 Reedy Island
MID ;@LUOWN. DOE---. 4 Augustine Beach
5 Appoquinimink W.A.
6 Woodland Beach W.A.
TO---. 7 Blackiston W.A.
EW CASTLE A- 8 Garrisons Lake
COUNTY 9 Silver Run W.A.
CLAYTON 10 S.P.C.A. Dog Shelter
SMYRNA 11 Little Creek W.A.
12 Moores Lake
LE-K 13 Derby Pond
14 Petersburg W.A.
1 15 Bowers Beach
16 McGinnis Pond
LITTLE
C
DOVER REEK 17 Andrews Lake
18 Coursey Pond
KENT *1011IG 19 Milford Neck W.A.
K ...... 20 McCauley Pond
C) MDN- 21 Haven Lake
114 UNTY 22 Silver Lake
4 1W 23 Griffiths Lake
11LION 17FREDER6CA 24 Blairs Pond
11 19 25 Cedar Creek
A 20 26 Fowler Beach
MILFORD 27 Abbotts Pond
HARRINGTON
i SLIUGITER 28 Primehook W.A.
24 '2 2 E.c. 29 Lewes A.A.
/2 2 30 Milton A.A.
31 Gordon Pond
2$ 11, A---. 32 Gravel Hill
GREENANOOD 29 33 Rabbits Ferry
AILT. LEWES 34 Tussock Pond (Collins)
A SUSSEX 35 Rehoboth Bay A.A.
BRIDGEVILLE 31 36 Craigs Pond
10 31 REHOBOTH 37 Rosedale Beach A.A.
34 33
_@x A__ "- 38 1 ngrams Pond
GEORGETOWN K-Olo. ...
COUNTY 8@1 5
39 Duck Creek A.A.
40 Pepper Creek
SEAFORD 41 Nanticoke W.A.
I ..... i@ .... .. 42 Records Pond
_E, .1 43 Portsville Pond
IA 44 Raccoon Pond
4 IE . . ...... 45 Horsey Pond
WEAC.
46 Assawoman W.A.
44 *Leased to New Castle County Parks and
DE-A SELBYVILLE Recreation Commission Dec. 14, 1967
FIA@;;-

Co moo M z >-pm! m T m --1 -0 mo or- -0 MOM TZ >M 0 >M KO -or-Wr- Eo:-5 > > M r'M -n
U M =: C o W 0 UM w 0 m C 0 0) CD M. 0 CD = 0) a- Ej' 2. = 0 0 :3 0 0 CD ;7+' -0 ;;' 0 0) 0 '0 C CD r- CD 0)
n - < 0 - n w - 0 0 :,E ;OT 3 * 0 - < < 0---Oc 0- * C) - :� 0 ct 0 -- 0 -0 - cD 3 0 0
0 CD 77 0@ 0) 70 CD n) 0 0 CD CD CD o 0 W CD CY'
m CD > CD - V;- 0-0 C CL ;7'
CD
W Cr m o ON 50- *0 c,D cmx- 3 0 (D - 0 cD m S. c@D r -
W o CL 0 > r -0 =r CL Cr C) 0 o 0
CD 0 77, 0 o W z 5 -0
CL o < Co Fn 0
0 C m -v ;r 3 -0 0 -0 -n 0 CD CD X' -V I o r-
CD CM Co M 0- M. CD M M
o M M CD U@ CD M
CD CU 0 -0 CD W M CD _0 0 _0 - 0
o n 0 0 0 CL 0 0- W 0 0, M c- * X, (n X, x r
0 CO CD M CL X, :3 X 0 = X o 0 00 3. cc) CL
77 M 0- x M M
0 < - M I W 0)
z CL 0- =r CL M 0- CD M @> * - *
CD > - CL CL 0 0
> . @> 0
> CD
0 1
> Cn z
0 0
C
CD
0
0
C
CO
--J 4@- (n W (D 41 a) W W 00 W Ln M 0
W - - a) 0 M Ln -C@ 0) CD W W W W M CD W --J M M rQ W N) IJ 4@- Ln CD -A, W CO Ln M U1
tj :-I CD F%j 0 M W -J 0 W 4 W M W W ',J M 0 rQ Cn 4:1 W Ln 4h@ UI 0 M W P. W -J M 0 fIJ N) M W - rJ 4 0 0 W a).
J C CO M C) 0 M Ln 0 6 1D. Z@) 6 b bo b bo i.) L@ b) b @j b b i4:,j zo zo b :,j b *0 0

0
CD r- >
Co P. Ln (00 0) W 0) W U1 4:- a) 0
a) N) LTI a) Ij 0 M CD 4 D. (A) (D U, -
CD
po :,J p 7- N p p :,J p 90 p p p 90 !IJ @j p @j p po p :,J . p P. tj p !I-) . p @4 !I-) @n K) p p p :-j - W
3 w - 0 (o a) 0 (D Ln CD M 0 (D W CD 00 D- 0 -J -J 0 0 0 W W W 0 W M WW-MWr,3CCWMW(DC-JCCDo
CD
00 :3
,NJ
Co W -P@-
(D C) C) W M (D W -j - Kj W Ln M W M P. (0 Ln 4@-
p p P, :p@ p p p @n :91. P, p p @4 91 p p 90
4h. 0 0 00 -p@ 0 C.0 0 00 0 [email protected] 0 C) -4 000 0-4 C Ln 0 C) 0

.41 -r-I 4h. W Ln Drivin

Swim

N) P. rQ - 4@- Salt W

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - M F resh

W " W " W M N.) 41@ K3 Na W 4@:, Picnic

W M rIj Ln Ln Ln W CM W Nature

Ln M - N) W N) W NJ W K) NJ NJ W W N) W Ili W W M W U1 N) W W Boatin

N) Huntin

W W Huntin

4@- r) rQ - A. N) Huntin

Three large tracts of land in central Delaware are used for both large and small game hunting.
These wildlife areas are Blackiston, near Kenton, Petersburg near Felton, and Milford Neck, near
Milford. Hunting is also allowed along the Chesapeake and Delaware Canal lands. Although the
Federal government owns most of these lands, they are used for public 'hunting through a
licensing agreement between the two agencies (Federal and State).

Four of the State waterfowl hunting areas exceed 500 acres. Woodland Beach Wildlife Area,
in northeast Kent County, consists of 3,543 acres. The Little Creek Area, east of Dover, is in
two sections; 345 acres in the northern part and 2,872 in its southern counterpart, making a
total of 3,217 acres. Primehook Wildlife Area is in northeast Sussex County and contains 635
acres. In southeast Sussex County is the Assawoman Wildlife Area with 1,460 acres.

The Woodland Beach and Little Creek areas both have large frontages on the Delaware Bay
and are very close to the Bombay Hook Migratory Waterfowl Refuge (Federal). The Primehook
area is near an area being acquired for another federal wildlife area similar to the Bombay Hook
Migratory Waterfowl Refuge. The Assawoman Wildlife Area is on Little Assawoman Bay and is
very close to the Atlantic Ocean. There are a few other areas used for waterfowl hunting, but
they are presently too small for much development. Other game, both large and small, is also
prevalent and accessible to sportsmen in these areas.

The Delaware River, the Delaware Bay and the Atlantic Ocean constitute the eastern
boundary of the State, affording salt water fishermen some of the best fishing in the country.
The Fish and Wildlife Division, in order to provide access to these waters as well as to other
tidewater rivers and bays, has acquired many conveniently located boat launch sites. The most
heavily used boat launches that they have constructed are as follows: Augustine Beach on the
Delaware River, Woodland Beach and Bowers Beach on the Delaware Bay, several sites in the
Indian River - Rehoboth Bay - Assawoman Bay area, Lewes on the Lewes and Rehoboth Canal,
Milton on the Broadkill River and Philips Landing on the Nanticoke River, now known as
Nanticoke W.A. (Some of these boat launch sites are included in the survey shown elsewhere in
this report).

Saltwater species usually found in the Delaware Bay or the Atlantic Ocean include croaker,
kingfish, drum, trout, flounder, bluefish, striped bass, tautog, spots and porgy. Several miles
offshore in the Atlantic Ocean are cod, tuna and marlin.

The Fish and Wildlife Division has purchased many fresh water ponds and has reflooded
other old pond sites, providing excellent fresh water fishing throughout the State. Two of the
most popular State-owned ponds in New Castle County are Becks Pond, south of Newark, and
Lums Pond, just north of Chesapeake and Delaware Canal. Good fishing in Kent County can be
found at Garrisons Lake, Andrews Lake, Derby Pond, McGinnis Pond, Coursey Pond and
McCauley Pond. Near Milford are Silver Lake, Haven Lake, Griffiths Lake and Blairs Pond; all
four are split by the Kent - Sussex County Line.

Sussex County Ponds that offer good fishing are Abbotts Pond, Craigs Pond, Portsville Pond,
Records Pond, Horsey Pond, Raccoon Pond and Ingrams Pond. Many of these ponds have
attractive picnic areas. Photography possibilities are numerous at these places, particularly at
some of the clear water ponds in the southern part of the State.

Trout fishing in Delaware is on a put-and-take basis. Annual stocking is necessary because of
the hot summer. Other fresh water game-fish, plentiful in Delaware, are chain pickerel, large
mouth bass, crappie bass, both white and yellow perch, bluegill, sunfish and the sometimes
undesirable catfish and carp.

ROADSIDE REST AREAS

The Division of Highways maintains 36 roadside rest and picnic areas throughout the State,
with more being planned or under construction. The level of development varies with all areas.
All have picnic tables and some with sanitary facilities, provision for outdoor cooking or
playground equipment.

The State has several parcels of land that were purchased in conjunction with road building
that are large enough for recreational uses. Some are used as picnic areas and rest stations,
others are large enough for nature study, and many of the exhausted borrow pits have
recreational possibilities. The Little League baseball fields at Smyrna-Clayton are on former
borrow pits and are good examples of land reclamation.

There is no record of law which mandates the use of highway land to outdoor recreation,
unless it is in compliance with the federal regulations established by the Bureau of Public Roads.
The site north of Smyrna, depicted on Figure 10, is a large area that has been established as a
roadside rest by the U.S. Bureau of Public Roads.

The Division of Highways has, however, adopted the policy that it should effectively and
fully utilize its lands and is striving to follow this policy by establishing and maintaining
roadside rests, picnic areas, and playgrounds - facilities which will aid the traveler.

PUBLIC EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS

Outdoor athletic facilities at many schools are available after school hours for recreational
purposes. Usually there is a nominal charge for the use of facilities to pay for extra custodial
expense and utilities. It is estimated that 5,000 acres of land are under the jurisdiction of the
Department of Public Instruction.

Whether or not a certain school site is available for outdoor recreation use is at the discretion
of the individual school district. However, the State has adopted the policy that the areas should
be made available if there is no interference with school use.

SUMMARY - STATE CONTROLLED OUTDOOR RECREATION AREAS

Approximately 36,700 acres of outdoor recreation lands are owned or controlled by the
State. These areas range from forests to seashore beaches, from wildlife area to picnic and play
areas, and from historic and prehistoric sites to modern recreational complexes. Table 6
summarizes these ownerships by administrative agency:

PA. Figure 10
STATE OF DELAWARE

IUONTE

EWPO
N. J. OUTDOOR RECREATION AREAS UNDER THE
NEWJRK NEW! ADMINISTRATION OF THE DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
. ..... ASTOf

ELAWA E
*-ROADSIDE RESTS

@EW CASTLE
COUNTY

DOVER

KENT

COUNTY

M)LFORD

-cl

LEWES
SUSSEX

M@EVILLE

IP REH0801-
__4m
I GEORGET@N
SEAFORD COUNTY

-@IUUE

PIT-1
SEACM

SELBYVILL

TABLE6

STATE-OWNED LANDSAVAILABLE FOR OUTDOOR RECREATION

Agency Acres*

Department of State:

Division of Archives and Cultural Affairs 95

Department of Transportation:
Division of Highway 100

Public Educational Facilities 5,188

Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control:
Division of Fish and Wildlife 18,733

Division of Parks, Recreation and Forestry 12,617
Areas rounded to nearest acre Total State 36,733

INVENTORY OF PUBLIC AREAS USED FOR
OUTDOOR RECREATION UNDER COUNTY AND
MUNICIPAL OWNERSHIP

Public bodies which have jurisdiction over outdoor recreation areas other than the State and
federal governments are counties and incorporated municipalities. To date only one of the three
counties and, nineteen of the fifty-three municipalities, have established public outdoor
recreation areas or manage lands for outdoor recreation purposes.
COUNTY OUTDOOR RECREATION AREAS
With the exception of the State and federal agencies, New Castle County has the largest total
amount of outdoor recreation land under its jurisdiction, Table 7 shows that New Castle has
jurisdiction over 2,200 acres ranging in size from play lots under five acres, to a reservation of
over four hundred and sixty acres. Most of the areas are classified as neighborhood or district
parks where very active recreation pursuits are conducted. It can be seen that the majority of
the County Parks have been strategically located to serve the more densely populated areas. It
appears that the most prevalent uses connected with these eighty-three park areas are
playgrounds, picnicking, basketball, baseball and of course open-areas. These outdoor recreation
areas presently under the jurisdiction of the New Castle County Park and Recreation
Commission are contributing to the overall need for recreation areas for Delawareans, as well as
contributing to the need for urban recreation areas.

TABLE 7

OUTDOOR RECREATION AREAS UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF
THE NEW CASTLE COUNTY PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION

KEY

Type Description Use Code

I Playlot - under 5 acres 1Basebal I
I I Neighborhood Park - 5 to 30 acres 2 Basketball
III District Park - 30 to 75 acres 3 Football
IV Regional Park - 75 to 200 acres 4 Playground
V Reservation - Over 200 acres 5 Picnic
N None Reported

No. Name Acres Type Use

1 Airport Villa 2.00 1 N
2 Alapocas Woods 109.60 IV 1,3,5
3 Alban Park 5.36 11 N
4 Albertson Park 6.47 11
5 Ashbourne Hills 18.65 11
6 Banning Park 156.42 IV 1,2,4,5
7 Becks Pond 55.00 111 5
8 Bonsall Tract 17.68 11
9 Brandywine Spring Manor 4.10 1
10 Brookbend Park 1.24 1
11 California Run Park - North 4.01 1
(includes Clair Estates and Marshallton Heights)

TABLE 7 (continued)

OUTDOOR RECREATION AREAS UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF
THE NEW CASTLE COUNTY PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION

No. Name Acres Type Use

12 California Run Park - South 19.15 11 1,5
(Includes Kiamensi Gardens, Rolling Hills
and Windermere)
13 Canby Park West 67.61. 111 1,4,5
(includes Canby Park West and Cleland Heights)
14 Carrcroft 1.12 1
15 Chapelcroft 3.40 1 N
16 Chelsea Manor Park 31.67 111 1,2,3,4,5
(Includes Chelsea Estates and Wilmington Manor)
17 Cool Run Park 25.06 11 1
(includes Chestnut Hill Estates, Tod Estates and
Cherokee Woods)
18 Carousel Farms 119.58 IV
19 Coventry Ridge Park 73.16 111
20 Chapel Hill 7.89 11
21 Darby Woods 2.73 1
22 Dartmouth Woods 4.80 1 N
23 Delcastle 460.40 V N
24 Delpark Manor 3.51 1 1,2,5
25 Devon 4.13 1
26 Devon Shire 6.23 11
27 Dunlinden Acres 3.02 1 2,5
28 Dunleith 9.42 11 2,4
29 Eastburn Acres 5.06 11 1,2,4
30 Edenridge 6.09 11
31 Fair Rock Park 8.80 11 1,2,4,5
(Includes Blue Rock Manor and Fairfax)
32 Faulkland Heights 2.00 1
33 Glendale 3.60 1 1,2
34 Glenville 44.30 111 1,2,4,5
35 Grayling .70 1 2,4
36 Graylyn Hills Park 15.69 11
(Includes Graylyn Crest and Holiday Hills)
37 Graylyn Park South 7.32 11 2
(includes Graylyn Crest 2, Chatthan and Graylyn
Crest 4)
38 Green Hill Golf Course 123.00 IV
39 Greenmeadow 2.33 1
40 Grenclon Farms 3.96 1
41 Gurfield Park 5.67 11
42 Harmony Brook Park 60.79 111 1,2,4,5
(includes Harmony Hills, Brookhaven Schroeder
Property and Sheffield Manor)
43 Harvey Mill Park 16.77 11 N
(Includes Holiday Hills 2, Lancashire and Kingsridge)
44 Heritage Park 9.40 11 1,2,4,5
(includes Heritage Park and Grenclon Farms 2)
45 Highland West 4.70 1
46 Holly Hill .40 1
47 Hyde Park 11 5.20 11 5
48 Jefferson Farms 7.29 11 N
49 Lewolen Greene Park 89.00 IV
50 Liangollen 74.75 111
51 Lonquien Farms 2.91 1
52 Lynnfield 2.87 1

TABLE 7 (continued)

OUTDOOR RECREATION AREAS UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF
THE NEW CASTLE COUNTY PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION

No. Name Acres Type Use

53 Meadowood 10.66 11 2,4,5
54 Milltown Park 13.48 11 1,4,5
(includes Limestone Gardens, Maple Crest and
Sheridan Squire)
55 Mont Berne Park 8.11 11
(includes Glen Berne Estates and Rothwell Property)
56 Montclaire Park 1.40 1
57 Naamans Park - N orth 8.82 11
(Includes the Timbers and Aston)
58 North Crest 1.18 1
59 Oak Lane Manor 4.40 1
60 Perkins Run Park 27.73 11 4,5
(includes Rolling Park, Gwinhurst, Claymont
Heights, Northridge, Greenmount and Hillendale)
61 Penn Acres 7.78 11
62 Pinecrest 4.12 1 4
63 Pleasant Hills 25.32 11
64 Radnor Green 5.28 11
65 Rambleton Acres 4.71 1
66 Riverbend Park 10.52 11 4
(includes Sycamore Gardens, Newkirk Estates
and Old Mill Manor)
67 Robscott Manor 6.92 11
68 Rockford Park 103.70 IV
69 Sellers Park 57.33 111
70 Shellburne 4.22 1
71 Shellpot Park North 19.01 11
(Includes Surrey Park, Delaynn, Cardiff, Woodbine
and Tarleton)
72 Shellpot Park - South 17.33 11
(Includes McDaniel Crest, Concord Manor and
Goodley Place)
73 Sherwood Park 4.15 1 4,5
74 Simones Gardens 5.94 11
75 Sherwood Park 11 3.93 1 2,4
76 Stoney Run Park 10.00 11
(Includes Carrcroft Crest and Northwood)
77 Westgate Farms 7.27 11 4
78 Westview 1.65 1 2,4
79 Wilmington Manor Gardens 9.50 11 1
80 Windy Mill Park 23.39 11 1,4,5
(Includes Windy Hills, Country Squire and Redmill
Farms)
81 Woodbrook 1.00 1
82 Woodland Run Park 57.13 111 1,2,3
(includes Oak Hill, Willow Run, Woodland
Heights, Brookland Terrace Woodland Park,
Tybrook and Brookemeade)
83 Woodley Park 34.83 111
(includes Sharpley and Woodbrook 111)

TOTAL AREA 2,226.82

MUNICIPALLY CONTROLLED OUTDOOR
RECREATION AREAS

New Castle County

As depicted on Figure 11, most of the municipally owned public recreation land in New
Castle County is in Elsmere, Newark, New Castle and Wilmington. Elsmere has four playground
areas, three of which are strictly of the neighborhood playground type. The other is similar in
nature but also includes a picnic area.

Newark has almost a hundred acres of city-owned land devoted to public recreation use. Also
83.5 acres of land is owned by the Greater Newark Recreation Association.

Battery Park in the City of New Castle covers 78.00 acres of land. This property has almost
one-half mile of frontage on the Delaware River.

The Director of Parks and Recreation controls the park system in Wilmington. The City has
had an active park and recreation program since 1883. To date the City controls 798.2 acres of
outdoor recreation areas, some of which are located outside the city limits.

TABLE8

MUNICIPALLY CONTROLLED OUTDOOR RECREATION AREAS
New Castle County

Total Number of Predominant
Municipality Acres Parks Use

Delaware City 1 2.2 1 Park, playfield
Elsmere 25.0 4 Playgrounds, picnic
Newark 2 98.0 9 Parks, playfields, picnic areas
New Castle 78.0 1 Park, playfield
Wilmington 3 798.2 44 Intensively developed

1 Also has 10.0 acres owned by Delaware City Commission Park District
2 Also has 83.5 acres owned by Greater Newark Recreation Association
3 290.7 acres lie outside City limits; 507.4 acres are within the City.
An additional 321.9 acres are leased to other agencies of which New
Castle County Park Commission has jurisdiction over 232.6 acres.

Kent County

The towns and cities in Kent County that own recreation areas include Cheswold, Dover,
Farmington, Leipsic, Smyrna and Wyoming, Dover has a good park system with a fine beach
area as its leading attraction. Smyrna and Wyoming also have scenic water areas as part of their
park systems. Figure 11 and Table 9, Municipally Owned Outdoor Recreation Areas, shows the
recreation acres held by each municipality in Kent County (including impounded water bodies).

TABLE9

MUNICIPALLY CONTROLLED OUTDOOR RECREATION AREAS
Kent County

Total Number of Predominant
Municipality Acres Parks Use

Dover 263.2 20 Swimming, playfields, boating,
(with water) parks, tot lots playgrounds
Farmington 5.0 1 Playfield picnic area
Leipsic 2.9 1 Athletic field
Smyrna 38.0 4 Swimming, playfields, parks
Wyoming 3.2 1 Park

Sussex County

In Sussex County, Bethany Beach, Delmar, Georgetown, Lewes, Milford, Millsboro, Milton,
Rehoboth Beach and Seaford have municipally owned recreation areas, Figure 11 and Table 10.

Bethany Beach and Rehoboth Beach have excellent beaches on the Atlantic Ocean. Lewes
has, in addition to its extensive park lands along the Lewes and Rehoboth Canal, a popular
public beach area just west of the Lewes-Cape May Ferry terminal. Milford is now improving its
park area on the west side of Marshall Pond.

TABLE 10

MUNICIPALLY CONTROLLED OUTDOOR RECREATION AREAS
Sussex County

Total Number of Predominant
Municipality Acres Parks Use

Bethany Beach 26.0 1 Swimming
Delmar 5.5 1 Playground, Playfield
Georgetown 1.0 1 Park
Lewes 111.5 4 Swimming, Park
Millsboro 6.5 1 Picnic, Playfield
Milton 14.0 1 Playfield, boating, fishing
Rehoboth Beach 77.0 8 Swimming, fishing, boating
Seaford 10.0 2 Swimming, playfield, picnic
Milford 3.0 1 Playfield, park

PA.

Figure I I
LEFt.,71 STATE OF DELAWARE

EISMEkf
IL,MINGTONt
4twpo .%
a N. J.
NEW@4AK
NEW.
A LIE

"WARE
MUNICIPALLY CONTROLLED OUTDOOR
RECREATION AREAS

6110@LITOWN

NEW CIRSTLE
COUNTY

LITTLA
DOVER

KENT
!71-

COUNTY

1-- FREM-1

MARR14GTON

F-1 KACH

GREENW-D

SUSSEX

KNOGOT. 8

"WEI
KAC.
(2) COUNTY

0-r"

PRIVATE RECREATION IN DELAWARE

Approximately eight thousand acres of land and water are devoted to private recreation. The
county totals are 1,300 acres in New Castle, 3,900 acres in Kent and 2,800 acres in Sussex.

NEW CASTLE COUNTY

There are so many small areas that the average size is less than 20 acres.

Game playing and picnicking are the most prevalent uses at these places in New Castle
County. Also popular are sightseeing and hiking. Northern New Castle County has the only
rolling terrain in Delaware, and the small amount of winter skiing that is done in the State is
done there. The streams that are most desirable for canoeing are in this same area.

TABLE 11

PRIVATE OUTDOOR RECREATION AREAS
New Castle County

ACTIVITY

>
Q, -0
C: LL Z) 0)
Cn C C"
C tm
CM C
C a
S E
=C=--y>1-r-MC-E
Cnu-co-Y Lhomom
Name i7)E < Z X co V) LL co (D L)

Noxontown Pond X X X X X X X X
Collins Beach X
Delaware River
Outboard Marina X
Ft. Christina Marina X X
Castle Hills
Liftwood
Brookview Apartments
Brookside Park
Garfield Park X
Forwood
Redmont X
Camp Mattahoon X X X X
Rambler Boat Works X
Eleutherian Mills* X
Old Swedes Church* X
Corbit-Sharp House* X
New Castle Historic
District* X

Registered Historic Landmark

KENTCOUNTY

Hunting and picnicking are the leading activities at Kent County private recreation areas.
Swimming and the operation of private aircraft are also enjoyed by large numbers of people.

TABLE 12

PRIVATE OUTDOOR RECREATION AREAS
KENT COUNTY

ACTIVITY

0) U_ :3
a) C +_
0) .0 U 0)
U) (0 C 0) 0) U) 0)
U 4- 0) 0) -0 rz C C C I
a) t- C 0 E
J__ C :3 Ul E _r_
L_ W CU C E
0 3: D 0 M
Name V) IL < z a: V) a: (D U

American Legion X
Artis Stables X
Ash Park X X
Barratts Chapel (MUSEUM)
Bowers Beach X X
Camp George X X X X X X X X
Councils Stables X
Del Air Park (FLYING)
Del Loo X X
De Marie Farm X
Dover Fairways X
Eastern Shore Fox Club X
Garrisons Lake Golf X X X X
Go-Cart X
Felton Viola Ruritan X
Fork Landing X X
Haven Lake X X
Jenkins Airport X (FLYING)
Kent Swim Club X X X
Mapledale CC X X
Milford Airport (FLYING)
Miller Farm X X
Millers Pond X X
Morris Ponds X
The Oaks X
Pleasanton Farm X
Smyrna Airport (FLYING)
Smyrna Swimming X X X
Voshells Pond X X
Wheelers Park X X X X X X
Woodland Beach X X
Woodside Railroad X
Kenton Gun Club X

SUSSEX COUNTY

Camping is popular useage of private recreation areas in Sussex County, especially in the
southeast part of the County, because of the many other activities associated with the Atlantic
Ocean and Rehoboth and Indian River Bays. Golfing and boating facilities are also heavily used.
The next most popular activity occurring on private recreation land in the county is fishing,
both fresh and salt water versions being excellent at most times. Table 13 shows the private
recreation areas and the recreation activities they support.

TABLE 13

PRIVATE RECREATION AREAS
SUSM COUNTY

ACTIVITY

C '0
0) LL_ :3
0) C +_ 0)
0 U C 0)
U') 0) 0) 0)
U 0) .-C C
C U E 7-
C >- E - C1.
0) U U U) ra C E
Name 0 =1 0 fo
a- < z CD LO LA_ M M CD L)

Arnold Palmer Dr. Range X
Bay Shore Campsites X X X X
Camp Antiock X X
Careys Camp X X
Collins Pond X X
Cubbage Pond X X X X
Del-Mar-Va Camp X X
Fli@etwoods Pond X X
Hearn Pond X X
Hickmans Marina X X
Indian River Yacht Basin X X
Log Cabin Hill X X X X
Love Creek Trailer Park X X
Lowes Recreation Area X X X X X
Lynn Lee Mobil Village X X X X
Masseys Landing X X
Misspillion Light X X
Murrays Farm X X X X X X X X
Nanticoke Shores, Inc. X X
Old Landing Golf Course X
Old Inlet Campsite X X X X
Pier Point Marina X X
Pine Haven Campsite X
Pot-Nets Park X X X X X X
Rainbow Cove Marina X

TABLE 13 (continued)

PRIVATE RECREATION AREAS
SUSSEX COUNTY

ACTIVITY

Name

Rehoboth Airport (FLYING)
Rehoboth Bay Sailing Area
Rehoboth Bay Marina
Rehoboth Country Club
Sandy Cove Camping Area
Seaford Golf
Seaside Campsite
Shawns Hideaway
Shawnee Country Club
Shockleys Boat-Tel
South Shore Marina
Sussex Rec. Center (archery)
Sussex Country Club
Swann Keys
Tuckahoe Acres
Whitehouse Farm

In addition to these areas, private conservation groups hold title to approximately 13,000
acres, most of which is owned by Delaware Wildlands, Inc. This conservation group, established
in 1961, is dedicated to the preservation of properties it deems irreplaceable and worthy of
protection in their natural state. The emphasis of this organization originally was the
preservation of the stands of Bolclcypress in Cypress Swamp and other parts of Sussex County.
More recently, the organization has expanded its emphasis to the New Castle County and Kent
County river and bay wetlands and the wetlands on Rehoboth Bay. The areas owned by
Delaware Wildlands are open for public use with permission for nature study, hiking, riding, and
hunting. These areas are of considerable value in meeting Delaware's outdoor recreation needs.

Additionally, over 21,000 acres are owned by private paper and pulpwood companies. Most
of of these ownerships are located in Sussex County with the majority being the 11,000 acres
owned by the Glatfelter Pulpwood Company, and almost 10,000 acres owned by Chesapeake
Pulpwood Company. Most of these ownerships are located in southwestern Sussex County. The
areas, according to the above companies, are open for hunting by permit, hoWever, other uses
are restricted due to the threat of fire and the lack of sanitary facilities. These areas are managed
by professional foresters and are selectively cut and reforested to assure a sustained growth of
marketable timber. Many smaller tracts are also known to be owned by lumber or timber
interest, however, the exact number and extent of these ownerships could not be ascertained.
These areas contribute to the State's outdoor recreation supply and provide valuable open
spaces, however, their long-range value is seriously constrained by their commercial character.

TABLE 14

SUMMARY OF PRESENT OUTDOOR RECREATION LANDS
(Land & Water Areas in Acres)
July 1, 1969*

Land Water Total

Private Sector
New Castle County 2j800 N/A Separately
Kent County 39900 N/A Separately
Sussex County 1,300 N/A Separately

TOTAL 89000 500 8,500

Public Sector - State
Fish & Wildlife 15,838 2,895 189733
Forests 6,365 - 61365
Parks 69044 208 6,252
Archives 95 - 95
Highway Rests 100 100
Public Education 5,188 - 5,188

TOTAL 33,630 3,103 36,733

Public Sector - Federal 25,080 270 25,350

Public Sector - New Castle County 2,203 23 21226

Public Sector - Municipal
New Castle County 1,002 6 19008
Kent County 144 168 312
Sussex County @82 - 282

TOTAL 19428 174 19602

Total Public Sector 62,341 39570 65,911

GRAND TOTAL 70,341 4,070 741411

Source: 1967 Inventory, Outdoor Recreation for Delaware and subsequent
updating of public ownerships to July 1, 19613.

Private sector data is July 1967.

DEMAND

Demand for outdoor recreation is increasing at a rapid rate, often much in excess of the rate
of growth in population. In witness of this demand, governments at all levels are beginning to
recognize that their responsibilities include facilities for accommodating much of this demand
just as they have been meeting the demand for social and health services.

Demand for any service is closely correlated to the major characteristics of our time. We are
an increasingly urban nation whose citizens are enjoying the highest level of affluence ever
achieved. We are also a very mobile nation, no longer content to remain at home, and in many
cases no longer able to enjoy the outdoor in that crowded urban setting. The rapid urbanization
of our landscape, increased family incomes, more leisure time due to the benefits of
technological advances, mobility, and many other factors are contributing to the growing
demand for outdoor recreation experiences.

All of these factors can be identified as they relate to Delaware and all of them compound
the problem of proper planning for outdoor recreation as well as for every other land use or
service. The proper distribution of always limited financial resources among the spectrum of
demands requires that these factors and their relationship to the actual use of facilities be
carefully explored.

Determination of the demand for outdoor recreation is further complicated; First, there is a
serious lack of both techniques and statistics with which to approach the task, with the lack of
the latter most critical. Creation and maintenance of useful statistics on participation in various
outdoor recreation activities need continuing attention by administrators, operators, and
planners of outdoor recreation facilities. Other complications include the difficulty in foreseeing
new technologies which provide for previously impossible experiences, a limited understanding
of the psychological aspects of recreation, and an even less clear understanding of the
cause-effect relationships between the supply of a facility and the demand for it. Nevertheless,
the use of present tools and careful insight are necessary to insure that the demands are met in
accordance with the most efficient use of the State's natural resources.

Th is section of the plan provides an indication of the factors affecting outdoor recreation
demand, the relationship over time of these factors and participation rates, and a projection of
outdoor recreation demands for the State of Delaware. The section utilizes the relatively new
concept of estimating demand based on social and economic characteristics of the residents in a
specific study area. The factors affecting demand include population, income, education,
occupation, household size, residence, mobility, and leisure. These are discussed in the following
sections.

It should be noted that the data presented is for the entire state. Delaware is considered one
planning region due to its size, the fact that all areas in the state are easily accessible from any
others in less than two hours, and the fact that basic social and economic characteristics of the
population are essentially similar throughout the state.

FACTORS INFLUENCING DEMAND

Populatioh

The growth, distribution, age characteristics, and composition of the population are
important elements affecting the future demand for outdoor recreation, especially in regard to
specific activities.

As shown in Table 15 the 39 county study area utilized for data collection and analysis
contains, not only, some of the fastest growing counties in the nation but, also, some major
metropolitan areas suffering declines.

TABLE 15

REPRESENTATIVE GROWTH RATES STUDY AREA, 1950 - 1960

Population Population
Metropolitan Increase Suburban Increase
Center Area -1950-1960 -County 1950-1960

Washington, D.C. - 4.8% Fairfax, Va. +179%

Montgomery, Md. +107%

Philadelphia, Pa. - 3.0% Bucks, Pa. +113%

Wilmington, Del. -13.0% New Castle, Del. + 95%

Source: 1960 U.S. Census of Population

The impact of this type of growth is a high level of demand for new recreational facilities in
the suburbs and the problems of redistribution of wealth and the tax base associated with most
,metropolitan centers. In the first case the suburban county is faced with an overwhelming
demand for all types of services while in the second case the metropolitan center in the face of
an eroded tax base must meet the needs of the remaining residents, who need a considerable
amount of recreational service as well as all other services. The problem in both cases is one of
allocation of very limited resources to meet the demand.

Delaware, with the sixth fastest growth rate in the nation, experienced a population increase
over the last 67 years from 184,735 in 1900 to 526,414 in 1967, according to the U.S. Census
of Population. It is expected to increase to almost 590,000 in 1970 and could reach 835,000 by
1980. If present growth rates continue, a population of at least one million is possible by the
end of the century. This growth, regardless of its composition, will undoubtedly result in the
need for additional facilities if future residents of Delaware are to enjoy outdoor recreational
experiences.

Age

Aqe is the sinale moq imoortant factor affectinci outdoor recreation accordinq to the
ORRRC* with this factor directly affecting the present and the future type of activities
demanded. Especially significant in regard to future demand is the relative age of the head ot
household. An area with relatively young family heads can expect higher future demands as the
present younger population develops habits of participation due to their expanded leisure and
affluence that would not have been developed by older segments of the population.

As can be seen from Table 16 the heads of households in Delaware tend to be younger than
those in the region. Even more significant is the distribution of age within the State's
population. A special census in 1967 indicated that more than 32 percent of the State's
population is under fifteen years of age, the group participating heaviest in the use of
playground areas. As shown in Table 17,, approximately 42 percent of the population is between

* The abbreviation "ORRRC" will be used for the Commission throughout the plan. The
Commission was an ad-hoc group established by congress in 1958. It is no longer in existence as
it has completed its assignments.

TABLE 16

AGE OF HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD AS PERCENT OF TOTAL
POPULATION, THE REGION & DELAWARE, 1960

Age of Head Metropolitan
of Household Region Delaware

0 - 24 6.4% 4.1%
25 - 34 22.8% 32.8%
35 - 44 26.1% 39.3%
45 - 54 19.5% 12.7%
55 - 64 16.8% 12.7%
65 - 74 7.5% 3.9%
75 - 84 .9% .4%

Source: New Castle County Planning Commission, Population Background
Study, 1966; Cole, Gerald Leon, Toward the Measurement of
Demand... ; U.S. Bureau of the Census, Population of Delaware,
1960.

fifteen and forty-five, the group that most actively participates in outdoor recreation activities.
This young population means a major commitment is necessary for the provision of outdoor
recreation facilities.

For most outdoor recreation pursuits, the age-to-participation relationship is progressive with
each older group participating less than the preceeding younger group. This is especially true for
the more strenuous activities, such as swimming, hiking, water skiing, and bicycling. Figure 16
indicates the composite participation and age relationships for some of the more popular
recreational activities.

PERCENT OF PARTICIPATION PERCENT OF PARTICIPATION
o-
0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0

m m

m
PERCENT OF PARTICIPATIC) PERCENT OF PARTICIPATION
N
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0
z

46
ZF L.

I
+

TABLE 17

DISTRIBUTION OF DELAWARE'S POPULATION BY AGE GROUP, 1967

Delaware Wilmington New Castle Kent Sussex

0 4 52,205 7,573 36,011 8,573 7,621

5 14 115,220 16,202 80,316 18,434 16,470

15 19 45,796 7,111 32,307 6,912 6,577

20 - 44 172,829 23,134 119,275 30,272 23,282

45 - 64 99,678 20,375 71,582 11,711 16,385

65+ 40,686 11,295 26,807 5,628 8,251

TOTAL 526,414 85,690 366,298 81,530 78,586

Median Age 26.6 32.4 27.0 23.9 29.0

Source: 1967 Special Census of Population

Residence

The distribution of the population in terms of its urban and rural character is also important
as this factor affects both the type and location of the facilities demanded. As can be seen in
Figure 13, the metropolitan portion of the State closely approximates the degree of urban
development of the entire metropolitan region. This relationship, while tempered by the rural
character of Southern Delaware, still holds for the State as a whole. Further, future
development will make the State even more urbanized, as most of the projected growth is in or
near the present urban areas. This trend is reflected in the location of outdoor recreation
facilities since many of these facilities will need to be located relatively near the more urban
development. The type of facility is also affected as, for example, the need for horseback riding
areas is more critical in the urban area than in the rural portions, where more open lands are
available. Much the same relationship holds for large land using activities such as hunting, nature
study, hiking, and bicycling. From Figure 13, and from the projection of urban growth
generated by the S 'tate's Comprehensive Development Plan, it is apparent that a major portion
of the State's program for action must consider the urban resident.

FIGURE 13

URBAN AND RURAL RESIDENCE, 1960
FARFAI

vX: :_X,
METROPOLITAN REGION 8,426,079
@.93 7

METROPOLITAN DELAWARE 307,346 13

SOUTHERN DELAWARE 138,846 81

TOTAL DELAWARE 446,192 34

Education, Income, and Occupation

The ORRRC reports found that there is a correlation between educational achievement,
income level, and Occupation in regard to the demand for certain types of facilities and the
degree of participation in various activities. Tables 18 and 19 indicate the educational
achievement of Delawareans in the 1950-1960 decade and that of the residents of the
metropolitan region of which Delaware is a part.

TA13LE 18

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT OF STUDY GROUPS

Metropolitan Metropolitan Southern
Educational Level Obtained Region Delaware Delaware

Elementary: 0 to 8 years 37.0% 37.8% 35%

High School: 1 to 4 years 44.5% 44.7% 54%

College: 1 to 3 years 8.4% 8.2% 7%

4 yrs. or more 10.1% 9.3% 4%

Source: New Castle County Planning Commission, Population Background
Study 1966; Cole, Gerald Leon, Toward the Measurement of
Census Po 1960
Demand... U.S. Bureau of the pulation or Delaware,

Delaware, with its rapid educational gains as witnessed by Table 19 could justify much of its
recreational program on this factor alone.

TABLE 19

MEDIAN YEARS OF EDUCATION ATTAINED FOR PERSONS 25 YEARS OF AGE
AND OLDER BY COLOR FOR WILMINGTON, BALANCE OF NEW CASTLE COUNTY,
KENT COUNTY, AND SUSSEX COUNTY 1950 AND 1960

Wilmington Balance of New Castle County Kent County Sussex County
Year White Non-White White Non-White White Non-White White Non-White

1950 10.2 7.8 9.3 5.2 9.4 7.0 9.0 6.2
1960 10.3 8.9 12.0 8.6 11.1 8.1 10.4 7.3

Source: C. Harold Brown and J. Keven O'Conner, Population of Delaware, Division of Urban Affairs,
University of Delaware, January, 1965

Income is also a major factor affecting demand in that for most types of outdoor recreation
activity participation was higher for persons of a higher income level. Table 20 indicates the
relative position of Delaware's residents and those of the larger region in this regard.

TABLE 20

FAMILY INCOME LEVEL OF STUDY GROUPS, 1964

Metropolitan Metropolitan Southern
Level of Income Region Delaware Delaware

Under $3,000 10.3% 12.5% 26%

$3,000 to $9,999 72.1% 66.4% 63%

$10,000 and Over 17.6% 21.0% 11%

Source: New Castle County Planning Commission, Population Background
Study, 1966; Cole, Gerald Leon, Toward the Measurement of Demand,
U.S. Bureau of the Census, Popul-a-fil'on of Delaware, 1960

The U.S. Bureau of the Census estimated Delaware's per capita personal income at $3,271
in 1964, the highest of any state in the nation and second only to the District of Columbia.
Forecasts of the per capita income indicate a steady rise to over $3,900 by 1980. The United
States' average in 1963 was $2,448. As indicated in the Comprehensive Development Plan, the
per capita disposable income in Delaware compares very favorably with that in the nation and
with that of the State's neighbors. In 1963, this indicator stood at $2,683 compared with a
national average of $2,122 to place Delaware second highest in the nation. If increasing income
affects participation as indicated by the OR R RC studies, this factor implies a great demand in
Delaware.

FIGURE 14
PER CAPITA
DISPOSABLE INCOME
DELAWARE, UNITED STATES
AND NEARBY STATES

2800

2700

2600
1963

2500

2400
0

2300

2200

2100
2000 D. L U.S MD. N. J. PA]
Source: Regional Economic Relationships of Delaware,
Division of Urban Affairs, U. of Del.

Occupation was also found to have an effect on participation and demand. The ORRRC
studies indicate that going up the occupational hierarchy from unskilled to professional
categories, the participation rate, for men at least, also increases. Table 21 indicates the
occupational distribution of Delaware workers. This factor also implies a rapid increase in the
demand for outdoor recreational facilities.
IU IS

TABLE 21

PERCENT OF EMPLOYED LABOR FORCE BY OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY
FOR WILMINGTON, COUNTIES AND STATE OF DELAWARE, 1960

Occupational New Castle Kent Sussex
Category Wilmington County County County State

Professional &
Technical 10.9% 18.5% 8.9% 6.9% 15.4%
Managers,
Officials 9.3% 10.5% 11.2% 11.4% 10.7%
Clerical and
Sales 15.1% 14.7% 12.4% 10.3% 13.7%
Craftsmen and
Foremen 22.0% 24.2% 22.2% 19.8% 23.2%
Operative 22.3% 18.7% 15.4% 21.4% 18.8%
Service Workers 10.1% 5.9% 5.3% 3.7% 5.5%
Laborers 10.1% 5.6% 9.2% 7.0% 6.3%
Other 0.2% 1.9% 15.4% 19.5% 6.4%

Source: Brown and O'Conner, University of Delaware

TABLE 22

WHITE, BLUE COLLAR WORKERS AS A PERCENT OF TOTAL POPULATION, 1960

Area White Collar Blue Collar

Metropolitan Region 13.2% 26.9%

Metropolitan Delaware 19.6% 16.2%

Southern Delaware 11.2% 19.3%

Source: New Castle County Planning Commission, Population Background
Study, 1966; Cole, Gerald Leon, Toward the Measurement of Demand
... U.S. Bureau of the Census, Population of Delaware, 1960

Household Size

Household size affects demand for outdoor recreation, largely because it often is related to
income. Also, it tends to limit the mobility of the family. Studies have shown that central-city,
non-white residents and suburban-white residents tend to have relatively high fertility rates.
These two groups tend to have more children and at an earlier age than most residents in other
parts of the region. The tables and graph in preceding sections show that the State is
approaching the urban rural character of the region as a whole. The impact of this factor on
demand is largely locational, affecting those facilities which appeal to family groups and in
which demand is directly related to the family's mobility.

Mobility

Mobility of the population is a recognized trend 'throughout the nation and the State.
Contributing to this mobility are the interstate highways (1-95, 1-495, and 1-295, which pass
through Delaware), the beltways around Washington D.C. and Baltimore, and improved
highways leading to the resort areas (i.e., U.S. 40, U.S. 50-301, U.S. 13, and Delaware 14).
Consequently, no portion of the study area is beyond a two to three hour drive of Delaware's
outdoor recreation opportunities. Within the State some 4,294 miles of State maintained roads
provide access to every conceivable resource location. The State is part of a major trend corridor
along the Eastern Seaboard as it is linked by expressways, bridges, bridge-tunnels, and ferry
service to the major urban centers from Richmond, Virginia to New York City. The result of
this corridor location is conducive to heavy travel through the State, much of its for recreational
purposes. Therefore, it is expected that the most accessible facilities will be heavily utilized.
Proper design and control of the use of these facilities will be essential to prevent the loss of
their natural character.

Another indication of the mobility of the Delaware population can be seen in Figure 15
Motor Vehicle Registrations.

FIGURE 15
400
350 JOOO

300

250
0

'Z 200

ISO

100

0
1940 1950 1%0 1970 1980

DELAWARE MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATION

SOURCE: MOTOR VEHICLE DIVISION, DELAWARE STATE HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT

As can be seen from analysis of this factor, Del aware will feel the impact of the mobile
population and, therefore, must be prepared for the resulting outdoor recreational demand.

Leisure

Although precise information as to the amount of leisure time for Delawareans is not
available, it is known that in general, the State's population is enjoying a shorter work week
than ever before. Today most Delawareans enjoy a work day of eight hours or less. However, it
should be noted that there are many factors vying for the average Delawarean's leisure time.
Much of his leisure time is not available for outdoor recreation activity. Many Delawareans
today live in suburbia or have lots in the city and are faced with long hours of yardwork -- I
spring, summer, and fall to maintain the attractiveness of their premises. In addition to these
functions, there are many active community and service organizations in Delaware, all of which
require a great deal of their members' time.

Nevertheless, the increases in leisure time that can be expected are dramatic. According to
the ORR RC, "By 1976, it is estimated that the standard scheduled work week will average 36
hours for the entire industrial work force versus 39 hours in 1960. And by 2000 it may be down
to 32 hours." ORRRC also indicated that the work week may decrease to about 31 hours by
the year 2000 in the Middle Atlantic States, while paid vacations will increase from 2.3 weeks to
almost 4 weeks by 2000. Figure 16 graphically displays these trends.

The shorter work day will allow more time for activities such as picnicking, pleasure walking,
and active play which are user location oriented, while longer vacations will increase the amount
of participation possible in activities which demand travel to the recreational resource.

Other factors affecting demand include promotional or state-wide advertising policies and
improvements to transportation systems. These two factors will be discussed in another section
of this report.

FIGURE 16
LEISURE TIME

60 5

50 Moto* 4 v@

0 LU
Lu
40 to 3 3:

30 2

20 1

0 0
1940 1960 1980 2000 2020

YEAR

AVERAGE WORK WEEK(HOURS)

=======WEEKS OF VACATION
Fnn@

SOURCE: ORRRC STUDY REPORTS 23 & 26

It is assumed that the full range of an individual's actions are determined by his choice of
one of many alternative actions. This does not mean that the individual has an absolute free
choice, but rather that he has a free choice of the alternatives which are accessible to him.
Therefore, every individual has constraints placed on him because of his social or economic
position in life. Certain forms of outdoor recreation appeal to one person or group of people,
while another person or group may be deprived of desired recreation because of social or
economic restraints.

DETERMINATION OF SOCIO-ECONOMIC VARIABLE AND PARTICIPATION

In line with recent efforts by the Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission
(ORRRC) and others to improve the validity of demand forecasts, emphasis has been directed
to the determination of specific recreation preferences and the interrelationship of various social
and economic factors upon demand.

The study area chosen for determination of appropriate socio-economic factors includes 39
counties in the Washington, D.C. - Baltimore, Maryland-Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Metropolitan
Region. The area, the survey, and regression analyses that produced the rates used in this report
are based on work undertaken by Gerald L. Cole for a doctoral thesis. The area was chosen
because it had the characteristics cited in recent literature as contributing to the growth in
demand for outdoor recreation. Furthermore, as shown later in this section, this area and the
metropolitan portion of Delaware (New Castle County) have similar growth patterns and
socio-economic characteristics. According to studies by the Uutdoor Recreation Resources
Review Commission, the factors affecting the demand include increasing population, increasing
income, increasing access and mobility, and increasing leisure time.

This 39 county study are was analyzed by Gerald L. Cole while a doctoral candidate in the
Department of Agriculture Economics of the Michigan State University. This study was based
upon a mail survey of some 2000 families in the metropolitan region. The questionnaire
included requests for information on participation in outdoor recreation activities as well as
data on the socio-economic characteristics of the respondent. The resulting responses were
tabulated and multiple regression analysis was used to derive both the participation rates and
their relationship to the various socio-economic demand factors. Dr. Cole's analysis and findings
provided the framework for projecting future demands for the 21 activities listed in Table 23.

As can be seen in Table 23, the greatest participation was greatest in those activities requiring
relatively little investment, while those requiring more monitary outlay such as golfing, hunting,
camping, and skiing had a very low percent of participation.

The ocean has a strong attraction as shown by the 50 percent of the households that
participated in swimming. Furthermore, the increasing rTiobility of the population is readily
apparent by the examination of participation rates for pleasure rides, vacation and weekend
trips, and those activities necessitating a trip prior to enjoyment of outdoor recreation.

TABLE23

NUMBER AND PERCENT OF HOUSEHOLDS PARTICIPATING BY OUTDOOR
RECREATION ACTIVITY WITH AVERAGE FREQUENCY OF
PARTICIPATION PER HOUSEHOLD IN ONE YEAR PERrOD 1963-64

(a) (b) (c) (d)
No. of House- % of House- Average Frequency of
holds parti- holds parti- Participation
cipating cipating Per House- Per Parti-
(of those (of those hold cipating
Activity responding) responding) Household

Pleasure rides 1,447 84 23.02 27.33
Picnicking 1,114 65 3.74 5.77
Swim-ocean 866 50 -Head 2.54 7.14
Homemaker 2.66 13.87
Children 2.04 5.47
Pleasure Walks 840 49 15.02 30.72
Swim pool away
from home 735 43 -Head 1.99 8.90
Homemaker 2.98 12.52
Children 7.73 21.08
Fishing 669 39 4.67 11.99
Boating activities 490 28 3.13 10.97
Ice skating 429 25 1.92 7.69
Swim-lake 367 21 -Head .83 6.37
Homemaker 1.05 7.98
Children 1.83 10.11
Swim-bay 290 17 -Head .65 6.07
Homemaker .83 7.71
Children 1.18 8.59
Golfing 265 15 3.28 21.26
Swim pool at home 250 15 -Head 1.03 16.29
Homemaker 1.59 22.95
Children 4.67 35.82
Hunting 248 14 1.58 10.94
Camping 242 14 .43 3.08
Horseback riding 201 12 1.40 11.97
Swim-river 156 9 -Head .38 4.14
Homemaker .36 3.92
Children .84 9.28
Swim-pond 63 4 - Head .20 5.48
Homemaker .19 5.18
Children .39 10.58
Tobogganing 57 3 .21 6.33
Snow skiing 53 3 .22 7.04
Vacation trips 1,069 62 .97 1.56
Weekend trips 996 58 2.53 4.36

Total Sample 2,000
Households Responding 1,718

Sou rce: Gerald L. Cole, Toward the Measurement of Demand for Outdoor Recreation in
Philadelphia, Washington, and Baltimore Region, P. 50.

FIGURE 17
PERCENT OF HOUSEHOLDS PARTICIPATING IN
VARIOUSOUTDOOR RECREATION ACTIVITIES
ACTIVITIES PERCENT OF HOUSEHOLD PARTICIPATION

0 20 40 60 so '100

PLEASURE RIDES

PICNICKING

VACATION TRIPS

WEEKEND TRIPS

SWIM-OCEAN

PLEASURE WALKS

SWIM-POOL (AWAY)

FISHING

BOATING ACTIVITIES

ICE SKATING

SWIM-LAKE

SWIM - BAY

GOLFING

SWIM- POOL (HOME)

HUNTING

CAMPING

HORSEBACK RIDING

SWIM-RIVER

SWIM- POND

TOBOGGANING,

SNOW SKIING
10 30 so 70 90

Participation rates are lowest for those activities requiring particular natural resources which
are limited in the Region. Although many of these activities show a relatively low participation
rate, and many are not statistically accurate in the strictest sense of the requirements of a
11 multiple regression" analysis, some relationships are identifiable and have great merit in the
projection of outdoor recreation demand.
According to Cole,3 the following variables and relationships are realized:

Time and Distance

When participation is related to distance to the site and travel
time, two patterns emerged. For activities such as pleasure rides, bay
and ocean swimming, boating, camping, vacation and weekend trips,
the participation is positively related to distance and time. These
activities, largely resource-oriented, exist near the centers of
population, hence a short trip may be necessary. Potential
participants either expend the time and travel the distance or they do
not; there is virtually no partial participation.

A second group of activities, such as fishing, picnicking, pleasure walking, pool swimming,
ice skating, golfing, hunting, horseback riding, tobogganing, and skiing possess a negative time
distance relationship factor. This means that according to Cole, user-oriented participation in
activities is such that few users will be attracted from a great distance. However, it should be
noted that the actual time expended per mile travelled is proportionately higher for these
user-oriented activities than the resource-oriented activities, this being due to the fact of the
more congested nature of the urban areas in which most users reside.

Socio-Economic Variables

According to Cole's analysis the following relationships are noted:4

"Participation in picnicking, swimming, ice skating, vacation and weekend trips is less
likely where physical handicaps are present among household members. Urban residents
are more likely to take walks than are farm residents. Farm residents are more likely to
participate in hunting than are urban residents. This agrees with the findings of the
CRPRC studies . . . Participation in swimming, pleasure rides, picnicking, and hunting is
less likely as age increases. No significant relationship was found between age and
participation in walking, fishing, boating, golfing, and camping. In those activities where
participation is a decreasing function of age, the opposite relationship is true between
participation and household size since age and household size are inversely related. In
addition, participation in walking, fishing, and camping is an increasing function of
household size.

Non-whites are less likely to participate in swimming, golfing, and ice skating, while
no significant relationship was found between race and participation in other activities.

Participation in pleasure rides, picnicking, fishing, golfing, and hunting was found to
be more likely as the level of education increases. As the level of income increases,
participation is more likely for pleasure rides, ocean and pool swimming, walking,
boating, ice skating, golfing, horseback riding, tobogganing, skiing, and vacation and
weekend trips. Participation decreases as income increases in the case' of picnicking,
fishing, bay swimming, and camping. The ORRRC studies found camping participation
to be positively associated with income.

3 Cole, P. 74
4 Cole, P. 77

Participation in boating and hunting is likely to be more frequent among blue collar
workers than among professional and technical persons, while participation in swimming
at pools and weekend trips is more likely among professional and technical workers Than
dmong blue collar workers. For other activities there was no significant relationship
touna between participation and occupation."

It should be noted that Dr. Cole's study does not fully cover the range of outdoor recreation
activities. It omits bicycling, sightseeing (except as part of pleasure rides or vacation trips),
attending outdoor sports events, nature walks, water skiing, hiking, or attending outdoor
concerts and plays. Since participation data for these is not available they cannot be projected,
however, it is recognized that they are important activities in park development and will be
allowed for in park concept plans.

Transportation Patterns and Facilities

As noted earlier, other factors affecting demand include the transportation patterns.
Generally, the results of an origin-destination (0 and D) are utilized to gain an indication of the
purpose of a specific trip. Conversely, the plotting of the origin and destination of the trip
produce "desire lines." These in turn result in an identification of potential transportation
needs.

The findings of an external survey conducted by the Delaware State Highway Department in
cooperation with the Delaware State Planning Office in 1966 have been tabulated in terms of
trip purpose and total number of visitors. The number of visitors is specifically important as this
figure must be added to Delaware's demand in order to accurately project the total demand for
outdoor recreation in the State.

The 1966 Origin and Destination survey determined that on an average weekday a total of
678 vehicles entered Kent and Sussex Counties from out-of-state for recreational purposes. This
count, however, does not accurately reflect the total number of visitors since it does not
account for weekend day visitors. Therefore, some modification is necessary.

In order to adjust the visitors factor, two assumptions have been made. The first assumption
is that visitors to Kent and Sussex Counties account for essentially all non-resident recreation
trips in the State, for this area is the location of most of the outdoor recreation resources for
activities which are not user location oriented.

The second assumption is that a factor of three applied to the average daily weekday trips
would result in a modified average daily trip figure which reflects the peak demand of a
weekend day. Applying this factor yields a modified average daily number of trips equaling
2,034.

Assuming further that each vehicle has 4.5 occupants, as was found to be the average in the
1966 survey, the average daily number of visitors for recreation purposes is computed as
approximately 9,000. It should be noted hat this figure is for an average summer season day
since Delaware does not have the resources which would result in a large number of visitors for
winter season outdoor recreation activities.

The number of recreation visitors to Delaware has been projected for the years 1980 and
2000, based on population projections for the region obtained from the U.S. Department of
Commerce. These projections will be discussed more fully in a later section of this report.

TABLE24

ASSUMED AND PROJECTED DAILY
RECREATION VISITORS TO DELAWARE
(Average Summer Day)

No. of No. of**
Year Recreation Trips Visitors/Day

1966* 2,034 9,000

1980 3,044 12,700

2000 4,000 18,000

Modified 0 and D average daily weekday
trips to account for weekend day trips
by non-residents for recreation purposes.
These projections correlate well with the
record of out-of-state visitors compiled
by the Division of Parks, Recreation and Forestry.
For example, on June 30, 1968 a total of
1,376 out-of-state vehicles (or approximately
5,500 visitors) were counted. In 1969, an
average of three summer days indicated some 7,900
out-of-state visitors.

Promotion Factors and Relationships

The impact of promotion or advertising activities on participation in outdoor recreation in
Delaware is difficult to measure, although some indications can be gathered from the various
"User Surveys."

For the purposes of this report, the present impact is relatively less significant than is the
understanding of the potential impact of a different promotional approach. Presently, the State
operates under a policy of promotion largely within the State and the nearby region through its
participation in most "Travel and Vacation" shows throughout the metropolitan region. Also,
the Economic Development Division answers numerous requests from out-of-state inquirors and
conducts a wide range of travel promotion activities.

In addition, it should be noted that certain facilities, especially the ocean beaches, are
promoted by private sources such as realtors, developers, and local chambers of commerce.

Based on local attitudes and the findings of the vacation home survey, it sppears that the
present promotional approach is popular. As was shown in the planning programs for Bethany
Beach and Lewes (both resort-oriented communities), many local residents have expressed a
desire to avoid the over-development, over-commercialization typical of other similar resort
areas. This opinion is also held by vacationers who indicated that they chose the area due to its
relative non-com mercial izati on.

F rom the standpoint of predicting demand one must assume that the present type and level
of promotion will continue - or that the State will undertake a major campaign to "bring in"
out-of-state users for some of its outdoor recreation facilities.

If the policy is changed and directed toward more promotion, the projections made here will
be inaccurate and considerably low. It is essential that policy makers also realize that additional
visitors, while adding to the local economy, are not doing so without additional cost. As with all
commodities, there must be a "trade-off." More people mean less space per person; more
ravelers mean less effibiency on road networks, etc. The important point, therefore, is that at
some point the increment to the economy is more than offset by the cost in terms of additional
t

land needs, increased maintenance, or loss in asthetics or efficiency of the facility.

Should the promotional policy be changed, as is suggested by the policies of this plan, the
level of such promotion must be carefully related to the outdoor recreation concepts desired
and the ability of Delaware residents to bear the cost required. Especially critical is the
advisability of promoting the resources which are highly promoted by private interests when
many other resources owned and developed by the State are not receiving the benefit of such
promotion.

USER STUDIES

As noted in the Inventory Section, surveys were conducted by the State Planning Office
to gain information on the trends, soecific uses-, needs, and desires of persons using Delaware's
outdoor recreation facilities.

Most of the findings of these studies tend to reinforce the assumption that Delaware
residents 'and visitors lave recreation characteristics simil6r to residents of the metropolitan
region. Additional fundings tend to promote a further breakdown within a recreation category
(such as boating). It is the latter that holds significance for this project. In the plan portion of
the project, especially that part covering facility design, the specific types of uses and the
suggested improvements must be considered. These surveys give insight into such factors as
aesthetics, reasons for selecting a specific site and vacation home ownership patterns. By careful
review of the results of these surveys, it is hoped that facilities developed to meet future
demand will reflect and be tempered by "user" desires.

PROJECTED DEMAND FOR OUTDOOR RECREATION IN DELAWARE

Methodology

The projections published in this chapter are based upon the report, The Economic Base of
Selected Geographic Areas, Historical and Projected 1929 to 2020 published in 1968 by the
U.S. Department of Commerce.

The projection of demand for Delaware and the metropolitan region uses the following
methodology:

1. Projected populations of Delaware and the surrounding metropolitan region for the year
2000 are derived from the previously mentioned U.S. Department of Commerce report.

2. The average daily number of visitors (out-of-state residents) is determined from the
Origin-Desti nation data (and correlated with the out of state visitor count required by
BOR) and is then added to the projected Delaware population. This yields a total
participation potential.

3. The per capita participation from Cole's study is multiplied by the projected population
to indicate the number of user days in the region and State.

4. These resultant numbers are then tempered by the projected socio-economic conditions
of the study areas.

5. The adjusted user days are then assigned a number of peak days per season of
participation. Division of the total user days by the assumed number of peak
participation days yields the peak day average number of users by specific outdoor
recreation activity to be accommodated in Delaware by the year 2000. This final figure
will, therefore, be the real projected demand. This figure is reported in the needs section
of the study as peak day demand is most closely related to existing capacities and
deficiencies.

The following sections are based upon the five stages mentioned in the methodology.

Population Projections

The population for the metropolitan region has been projected by the Water Resources
Council publication, Preliminary Report on Economic Projection for Selected Geographic Areas
1929-2020. The figures from the economic areas "01016," Philadelphia-Trenton-Wilmington
and -01018," Washington-Baltimore are combined to give the population for the metropolitan
region.

Regional Population - 2000 A. D.

Some questions could be raised because the study area of Cole's thesis does not exactly
duplicate the economic regions from the Department of Commerce. However, the slight overlap
of study areas is not detrimental to the study since the fringe counties will be increasingly
urbanized during the plan period, and Cole's study area is representative of the metropolitan
region as it is today, while the Department of Commerce's economic region is representative of
the metropolitan region by the year 2000. Based on the Department of Commerce projections,
the population for the Philadelphia-Baltimore-Washington metropolitan region in 2000 is
determined to be 19,731, 100 persons.

Delaware Population - 2000 A. D.

In order to project demand for the year 2000, it is necessary to develop a reasonable
estimate of the State's population in that year. While many very sophisticated techniques are
available for this purpose, these are outside the scope of this outdoor recreation plan.
Nevertheless, a projection is necessary and this report examined two techniques, share of the
region and trend projection, in order to arrive at the 2000 population.

The former approach assumes that Delaware's population will retain a similar proportion of
the region's future population (e.g. 5.8%). Using this approach, Delaware's 2000 population
would approximate 1,040,000 persons.

The other approach determines the past growth rate and projects that rate based on a trend
line plotted through the points of record. This technique has been applied twice since a 1980
population projection of 715,000 was developed in the initial updating efforts for the State's
Comprehensive Development Plan and since a 1967 special census was also available. The
results of plotting in the first case would yield a population of approximately 1,200,000 while
in the second case a projection of approximately 950,000 is obtained. The great divergence
between these projections is due to the considerably slower growth rate of the State in the
1960-1967 period as compared with that of the 1950-1967 period. (See Figure 18)

FIGURE 18
COMPARATIVE
POPULATION PROJECTIONS
STATE OF DELAWARE

1,300 Aj
A. BASED ON 1950-60 GROWTH
PLUS 1980 PROJECTION
B. SHARE OF REGION
C. BASED ON 1950-67 GROWTH
1,100

0
0 ** C
2 900

z
0
700 10
Z
0

500

300

loo
1967
1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000

As two of the approaches approximate 1,000,000 persons in the year 2000 and given the
apparent slowdown in the growth rate of the 1960-1967 period, this section will utilize a
population of 1,000,000 for projection of the year 2000 demand. The recently established 1980
projection of 715,000 will be retained for consistency with other planning programs. When the
1970 census data becomes available, both the 1980 and 2000 projections should be reviewed
and subsequent updatings of the outdoor recreation plan will reflect any necessary adjustments.
The 1980 population and demand projections will serve to outline the necessary outdoor
recreation actions that must be undertaken in the near future while the 2000 projection will
outline the actions necessary in the long range. With increasing urbanization a way of life, a
response is needed now in order to serve the future population regardless of whether the exact
population projection is reached in 1980 or 1982, or in 2000 or 2002.

POTENTIAL DEMAND, CALCULATION OF USER DAYS

A user day, for the purposes of this study, is simply a way of expressing the aggregate of the
total participation in a specific activity during a year based upon the number of potential
participants and the annual number of times (frequency) such participation is desired.

The number of user days is calculated for each activity prevalent in Delaware by multiplying
the participation frequency (column C) from Table 23 by the projected population.6

' * 'These rates are considered as per capita rates except where
evidence from the study indicated that all members of the household
did not participate in an activity. Adjustments were made in the
participation rates for the following activities: hunting, horseback
riding, fishing, ice skating, and golfing. The first four participation
factors were divided by two because primarily children, or in the case
of hunting, heads of households and children participate. For golfing,
the rate was divided by three because primarily only heads
participate with children or other household members on rare
occasions.

Tables 25 and 26 indicate the "User Days" by specific activity for Delaware residents, for
out-of-state in Delaware, and total participants in Delaware's outdoor recreation areas for the
years 1980 and 2000 based on present per capita participation rates.

The method of calculation for this projection is as folloyvs:

Per Capita Participation Rate X Population = User Days

This calculation is done for Delaware population and visitor population and the two results
are added to get total user days.

As can be seen from the preceding tables, the projections indicate that over one-half of the
total user days will be comprised of pleasure rides and walks. Swimming of all types is the third
most important activity with swimming at the ocean and in pools away from home being most
popular.

5 An original 1980 estimate of 834,000 from the Development Plan was substantially reduced
after preparation of an Age-cohort projection for 1970, 1975, and 1980 during December 1969.

6 Cole, P. 79.

TABLE25

PROJECTED USER DAYS FOR OUTDOOR RECREATION ACTIVITIES,
DELAWARE RESIDENTS, NON-RESIDENT VISITORS AND TOTAL USERS, YEAR 1980

Delaware Non-Resident Total
Per Capita Resident Visitor User Days
Frequency of User Days User Days in Delaware
Activity Participation (In Thousands) (In Thousands) (In Thousands)

Pleasure
Rides 23.02 16,459 300 16,759
Picnicking 3.74 2,674 50 2,724
wim-Ocean
Head 2.54 1,816 35 1,851
Homemaker 2.66 1,902 35 1,937
Children 2.04 1,459 30 1,489

Pleasure Walks -15.02 10,739 195 10,934
Swim-Pool
(Not at Hom*e)
Head 1.99 1,423 25 19448
Homemaker 2.98 2,130 40 2,170
Children 7.73 5,527 100 5,627
Fishing2 2.34 1,673 35- 1,708
Boating
activities 3.13 2,238 40 2#278
ice Skating2 .96 686 686

Swim-Lake
Head .83 593 10 603
Homemaker 1.05 750 15 765
Children 1.83 1,308 25 1,333

Swim-Bay
Head .65 465 10 475
Homemaker .83 593 10 603
Children 1.18 844 15 859
Golfing3 1.09 779 15 794
Swim-Pool
(at Home)
Head 1.03 736 736
Homemaker 1*59 1,137 1,137
Children 4.67 3,339 3,339
Hunting2 .79 565 10 575
Camping .43 307 5 312
Horseback
Ridin82 .70 504 7 511
Swim-River
Head .38 272 5 277
Homemaker .36 257 5 262
Children .84 601 10 611

Swim-Pond
Head .20 143 4 147
Homemaker .19 136 5 141
Children .39 278 5 283

TABLE 25 (continued)

Delaware Non-Resident Total
Per Capita Resident Visitor User Days
Frequency of User Days User Days in Delaware
Activity Participation (In Thousands) (In Thousands) (In Thousands)

Tobogganing .21 150 150
Snow Skiing .21 150 150
Vacation Trips .22 3,288 60 3,348
Weekend Trips 5.06 3,618 65 3,683

Delaware Population, 1980 - 835,000
Non-Resident Visitors, 1980 - 13,000 average per day

Not calculated for visitors due to insufficiency of Delaware resources for
these winter activities

1Source: Cole, P. 50 - factored according to study findings
2Frequencies divided by 2 (see text)
3Frequency divided by 3 (see text)
4Frequency multiplied by 4.75 days (average trip length from survey)
5Frequency multiplied by 2.00 days in weekend

TABLE 26

PROJECTED USER DAYS FOR OUTDOOR RECREATION ACTIVITIES,
DELAWARE RESIDENTS, NON-RESIDENT VISITORS AND TOTAL USERS, YEAR 2000

Delaware Non-Resident Total
Per Capita Resident Visitor User Days
Frequency of User Days User Days in Delaware
Activity Participation (In Thousands) (In Thousands) (In Thousands)

Pleasure
Rides 23.02 23,020 405 239425
Picnicking 3.74 3,740 65 30805
Swim-Ocean
Head 2.54 2,540 55 29595
Homemaker 2.66 2,660 50 2,710
Children 2.04 29040 35 2,075
Pleasure
Walks 15.02 15SO20 270 15,290
Swim-Pool
(Not at Home)
Head 1.99 1,990 35 2,025
Homemaker 2.98 21980 55 3,035
Children 7.73 7,730 140 79870

TABLE 26 (continued)

Delaware Non-Resident Total
Per Capita Resident Visitor User Days
Frequency of User Days User Days in Delaware
Activity Participation (In Thousands) (In Thousands) (In Thousands)

Fishing2 2.34 2%340 40 2%380
Boating
Activities 3.13 3,130 55 3,185
Ice Skating2 .96 960 (6) 960
Swim-Lake
Head .83 830 15 845
Homemaker 1.05 1,0 50 20 1,070
Children 1.83 1,830 30 1,860
Swim-Bay
Head .65 650 10 660
Homemaker .83 830 15 845
Children 1.18 1,180 20 1,200
Golfing3 1.09 1,090 20 1,110
Swim-pool
(at Home) (7) 1,030
Head 1.03 1,030
Homemaker 1.59 1,590 (7) 1,590
Children 4.67 4t670 (7) @41)670
Hunting2 .79 790 15 805
Camping .43 430 5 435
Horseback
Riding2 .70 700 15 715
Swim-River
Head .38 380 5 385
Homemaker .36 360 5 365
Children .39 390 5 395
Tobogganing .21 210 (6) 210
Snow Skiing .22 220 (6) 220
Vacation
Trips4 4.61 4,610 85 45695
Weekend
Trips5 5.06 59060 90 5,150
Swim-Pond
Head .20 200 5 205
Homemaker Ag 190 5 195
Children .39 390 5 395

Notes:

Delaware Population, 2,000 - 1,000,000
Non-Resident Visitors, 2,000 - 18,000 per day average

(1) Source: Cole, P. 50 - factored according to study findings
(2) Frequencies divided by 2 (see text)
(3) Frequency divided by 3 (see text)
(4) Frequency multiplied by 4.75 days (average trip length from survey)
(5) Frequency multiplied by 2.00 days in weekend
(6) These categories discounted for visitors as Delaware does not offer
natural resources for which such use would be significant
(7) Swim-pool at home by its definition discounts any visitor participation

The three most popular activities comprise nearly 76% of the total user days of participation
of the remaining activities, vacation trips and weekend trips are most popular, followed by
boating, fishing, and picnicking.

The same findings are assumed for non-residents except that certain activities are not
evaluated since they could not be satisfied by resources in Delaware. These activities are ice
skating, snow skiing, and tobogganing. Also deleted is the activity of swimming in a pool at
home as the definition of this category automatically eliminates visitors.

These calculations express potential demand expressed in current participation rates. The
next section discusses the adjustments necessary to accommodate future participation rates.

SOCIO-ECONOMIC ADJUSTMENT

Since the preceding user day projections are based upon current participation rates, they
may not accurately predict future rates given certain trends in socio-economic conditions. In
accordance with the findings of ORRRC Study No. 26, Prospective Demand for Outdoor
Recreation, the aggregate effects of changes in the composition of the population in regard to
income, education, occupation, residence, age, and leisure must be considered in regard to the
participation frequencies. The composite of these functions and the underlying assumptions
f rom 0 R R R C are presented bel ow.

Specific Changes:

Urban-Rural Residence

The Bureau of Outdoor Recreation estimates that forty years hence urban areas are expected
to include 70 percent of all persons (U.S. citizens) and rural areas 30 percent.

In the Philadelphia to Washington study region the inc reased urban residency will mean that
the numbers of rural residences will be statistically insignificant when compared to the numbers
of urban residents. Activities which are depressed most by the anticipated change in this factor
are those often or usually pursued in rural environments -- hunting, horseback riding, and
fishing. There will be an increase in the activities -- walking for pleasure, playing games,
sightseeing, and nature walks.

Age Structure of Households

Considering the projected distribution of age for the entire United States, it is estimated that
the age group 12-24 will gain about 5 percent of the total population at the expense of the
45-64 age group.7 The net effect is that participation rates for water skiing, snow sledding, ice
skating, and playing games will increase by 5 percent and other participation rates will remain
relatively constant.

Larger Households

While no information is available for the specific study areas, it can be assumed that the
family size will remain relatively constant. The birth control pill makes planned parenthood
possible, but does not dictate the size of households.

White-Non-White People

Because of the recent pressure for equality of minority groups, this study assumes that the
socio-economic stigma connected with not being white will be increasingly reduced. This report,
therefore, anticipates that a person's color will not dictate his social and economic status in the
near future. Therefore, white - non-white percent composition will have no relationship to
recreation desires.

Educational Attainment

Although median years of schooling completed by persons 25 years and over may easily be
compiled, expressing the change in relative terms in a sense equals the first grade with a year of
graduate work. In other words, the original distribution by educational attainment is along a
qualitative rather than a quantitative scale.8 Obviously, however, more people will be graduating
from high school and college at a rate perhaps twice that of today.

As a net result, participation rates are expected to rise for boating activities and hiking. All
other activity rates will rise slightly with the exception of hunting, fishing, and walking for
pleasure.9

7 ORRRC, P, 30
8 ORRRC, P. 50
9 ORRRC, P. 30

Income

Per capita real income is expected to rise 114 percent between 1960 and 2000. Median
family incomeswill rise from $5,100for 1960to $11,100 for 2000-- almost the same asthe per
capita income. However, greater changes are expected in real income over the next forty years.
While the average real income available per person will more than double, the structure will
remain essentially unchanged; hence, the net effects to 2000 attributable to the factor appear
very modest indeed. Only very slight changes are anticipated in participation rates.10

Blue C ol lar-P rofessional Jech n ical Workers

Very modest shifts are anticipated for occupational patterns. ORRRC anticipates slight
increases in Professional-Technical workers (.04%) while there are equal decreases of the
percentage of blue collar workers. 11

In order to estimate the composite effects of the changes in the various socio-economic
variables, the study will utilize the standards found in ORRRC's Prospective Demand for
Outdoor Recreation. That chart is presented on the following page as Table 27.

These figures are slightly out of order, but it can be seen that multiplying the "Composite
of 6 Factors" by the number of user days in Tables 25 and 26 will give us the future demand
based on socio-economic changes. This data is presented in Table 28.

The user days reflected in Table 28 are derived by multiplying the number of user davs from
Tables 25 and 26 by the composite factors increase function M + 100% (from Table 27). This
results in DEMAND by type of activity for the year 1980 and the year 2000 as modified by
assumed changes in socio-economic characteristics. Demand at this point is expressed in terms
of total annual times of participation in the specific outdoor recreation categories.

As can be seen from the summary table (Table 28), the most popular activities in the future
will be pleasure rides, swimming in all types of facilities, and pleasure walks. These activities,
however, now account for 75% of all participation rather than the 76% they accountedfor using
present per capita rates. This decrease can largely be explained by anticipated increases in
vacation trips and weekend trips due to shorter workweeks, longer paid vacations, and more
holidays in the future.

These findings will be utilized for the determination of outdoor recreation needs, the next
study in this project. The expressed total demand will, in that report, be expressed as potential
daily users, evaluated as to whether it represents a resource or a user orientation, examined as to
the degree that Delaware residents will actually participate in the State due to the capacity of
existing facilities. The findings of this study and the needs study will largely determine the plan
and policy that follow.

Limitations of Data

As with any projection technique, there are certain limitations. In this case the limitations
are primarily with the data as Dr. Cole's study was conducted during 1963-1964 and, therefore,
is somewhat dated. Further, the data base, some 2,000 questionnaires, is rather small as a
sample of the Wash ington-Balti more-Ph iladelphia metropolitan region. The sample does,
however, indicate the pattern of participation even if it may not exactly duplicate it.

10 Ibid. P. 30
11 Ibid. P. 20

TABLE27

ESTIMATED NET AND COMPOSITE EFFECTS (PERCENT CHANGES) AND 1960 TO 2000
UPON SELECTED SEASONAL DAYS-PER-PERSON ACTIVITY RATES,
EXPECTED FROM CHANGES IN 6 SOCIO-ECONOMIC FACTORS

Age- 6 Factor
Season and Activity Income Education Occupation Residence Sex Leisure Composite

Summer: June-August

Driving for pleasure 8.4 5.7 1.0 -.8 3.1 9.6 29.8
Swimming 22.7 12.3 1.4 2.2 3.5 18.6 75.3
Walking for pleasure 3.9 -.3 1.3 7.7 .6 24.4 41.4
Playing outdoor
games or sports 13.0 12.7 1.1 2.5 5.5 29.0 79.7
Sightseeing 14.0 7.2 1.1 2.5 -.4 16.4 46.8
Picnicking 6.5 8.5 .9 2.1 1.9 5.4 27.9
Fishing -1.5 2.4 -.4 -8.2 2.7 7.9 2.3
Bicycling -5.9 9.5 .2 -6.1 4.6 0 1.4
Attending outdoor
sports events 3.9 9.2 .3 -1.2 2.6 7.1 23.5
C9 Boating other than
saling or canoeing 31.1 10.1 1.1 .4 2.3 19.4 78.9
Nature walks 13.0 7.1 -.3 2.5 1.4 9.8 37.6
Camping 25.6 10.5 1.4 -3.8 2.4 44.7 100.6
Horseback Riding 6.6 15.8 -.4 -11.7 4.6 16.7 34.1
Water skiing 54.7 16.1 .5 -.1 7.9 27.2 147.4
Hiking 26.4 15.2 4.9 -.3 1.8 21.8 88.7
Attending outdoor
concerts, drama,
etc. 21.4 9.8 2.6 1.2 1.7 20,4 69.5

Fall: September-November

Hunting 3.4 1.6 -2.7 -13.3 4.5 0 -7.3

Winter: December-February

Hunting 2.6 -2.9 -3.1 -12.7 4.7 0 -11.8
ice skating 11.7 13.8 -.1 1.6 5.9 46.1 99.6
Sledding or
Tobogganing 4.2 10.8 -.2 .7 5.0 26.6 54.2

Another concern with the data is generated by its variance from a rdport by the U.S.
Department of the Interior in 1965 entitled "Outdoor Recreation Trends." The trends indicated
in this report are somewhat different than those reported by Dr. Cole, especially in regard to the
leading activities. For the purposes of this plan Dr. Cole's study appears to be more related to
the region than the national study conducted by the Department of the Interior as Dr. Cole's
research is based on the participation rates of residents in the area of Delaware's influence while
the national study includes these residents plus residents of the rest of the country. It is
doubtful that residents of the central portions of the country have similar characteristicsor
interests as those in the east.

A detailed and expanded summary of recreation demand of the type conducted by Dr. Cole
is essential to accurate planning and will be undertaken during the next updating of the plan.

TABLE28

Modified User Day Projections Based on Composite
Effects of Changes in Socio-Economic Characteristics,
Projected Demand for Year 1980 & Year 2000

Composite 1980 User Days (xl,000) 2000 User Days (xl,000)
Factors: Unmodified Modified Unmodified ffo`dT`=ied
Activity % Increase (Table Total (Table Total

Pleasure Rides 29.8 16,759 21,753 23,425 30,405
Picnicking 27.9 2,724 3,484 3,805 49865
Swim-Ocean 75.3 5,277 99251 7,380 12,940
Pleasure Walks 41.4 10,934 15,461 15,290 21,620
Swim-Pool
(not at home) 75.3 9,245 16,208 12,930 22,660
Fishing 2.3 1,708 1,747 2,380 22435
Boating 78.9 2,278 4%075 3,185 59700
Ice Skating 99.6 686 1,369 960 19915
Swim-Lake 75.3 2r701 49737 39775 6,620
Swim-Bay 75.3 1,937 3,396 29705 49740
Golfing 79.7 794 1,427 1,110 1,995
Swim-Pool
(at home) 75.3 5,212 9,137 72290 12,780
Hunting -11.8 575 507 805 710
Camping 100.6 312 626 435 870
Horseback
riding 34.1 511 685 715 960
Swim-River 75.3 1,150 2,016 1,605 29815
Swim-Pond 75.3 571 1,004 795 1,395
Tobogganing 54.2 150 321 210 325
Snow Skiing 54.2 150 231 220 340
Vacation Trips12 100.0 3,348 69696 4,695 99390
Weekend Trips12 100.0 3,683 79366 5,150 109300

12 Vacation trips and weekend trips reflect projected decrease in hours of
work, a doubling in length of paid vacation, and an increase,in numbers
of paid holidays from 6 in 1960 to 10 in 2000 (see ORRRC, Report #26,
P. 29)

NEEDS

Determination of the total present supply of outdoor recreation facilities and the projection
of total demand for various facilities are not sufficient to provide the background data necessary
for - plan development. A third element is necessary. This element, computation of need, is the
result of subtracting the present inventory from the projected total demand to indicate the level
of action necessary to meet the unsatisfied outdoor recreation demand. The Needs Section,
therefore, provides the framework of land and facility requirements which can be addressed by
Stat e, local and private action and against which progress can be measured.

. This section will relate the projected demand; will determine the specific recreational activity
needs for 1980 and 2000.

STANDARDS

In order to determine if present facilities are adequate for future needs, maximum capacities
of each facility are necessary. Further, if present facilities are not adequate, the deficiency must
be expressed in terms of future land and facilities as well as number of presently unserved
outdoor recreation participants. For these reasons, standards of space per activity per person or
group of persons are required. This section presents standards derived from various reports,
plans, and studies prepared by federal, state and local agencies.

It must be recognized that standards serve as a guide to planning, not an absolute measure of
need. The character of each site, the nature of the present and potential uses, and the aesthetics
or "quality" of the locality will alter the actual acreage needed.

General standards of the "number of acres/1000 population" type are the most commonly
used guidelines for delineating areas of primary need and for indicating the areas where
emphasis is necessary. These, however, are not adequate for the level of detail to which this
project is committed, as they do not allow for breaking down need by specific activity. The
standards used in this report relate to specific outdoor recreation activities and allow for
translation of projected average users per day into specific land requirements.

The following standards were derived after a review of literature on outdoor recreation
planning. A list of the sources for each standard is included at the end of this section. Standards
developed by the State Parks Commission.or from the park user, boat ramp user, and vacation
home surveys conducted as part of the Inventory of Outdoor Recreation Facilities in Delaware,
were used where available. Each standard was applied to the projected user days for each
specific activity to develop the total needs in terms of person (user) capacity.

STANDARDS FOR SPECIFIC ACTIVITIES

Picnicking

Picnicking is traditionally a family activity taking place during the spring, summer and early
fall months (a season ,of approximately 160 days), with most picnicking participation occurring
on weekends and holidays.

The followLng standards and formulas are used for determining needs:

Stanclards'13

Percent of participation occuring on peak days 60%
Turnover rate per day per table (TR) 2
Peak days per season (Sundays and Holidays) PD 14
Persons per table per party (PT) 4.5
Tables per acre (TA) 13

Formula

a) Table needs = User Days x 60% User Days x 60%
(PD) x (TR) x (PT) 14 x 2 x 4.5

= User Days x 60%
126

b) Land needs = Table Needs Table Needs
(TA) 13

Camping

Camping is also a family activity, occurring most frequently on weekends or short vacations
during the summer season (assumed at 84 days).

13 See Notes and Sources of Standards (end of Needs Section)

Th e following standards and formula are used for determining camping needs:

Standards'14

Percent of participation occuring on peak days 60%
Turnover rate per day per unit (TR) 1/2
Number of peak days (2 day weekends) PD 36
Campers per camp unit (c) 4.5
Units per acre (CU) @ 8,000 square feet each 5

Formula

Number of Units User Days x 60% = User Days x 60%
(PD) x (TR) x (c) 36 x 1/2 x 4.5

User Days x 60%
81

Number of developed acres = Number of Units = Number of Units
Boating and Water Skiing CU 5

Boating is one of the most rapidly increasing outdoor recreation activities, largely due to
continued prosperity and increasing amounts of leisure time. As noted in the Demand Study,
participation in boating is expected to account for 5,700,000 user days in the year 2000. Water
skiing, one of the common boating activities is assumed to account for 10% of the total boating
demand and is broken out separately because slightly different standards are involved when
water skiing is possible. The following standards and formulas are used for computing needs for
these facilities:

13 - 14 See Notes and Sources of Standards (end of Needs Section)

Standards - Boat Lau nchesl 5

Boat Launch Capacity (12 feet wide) 40 Boats per day
Standards - Boating 16

Percent of total participation (non-water skiing) = 90%
Percent of participation occurring on peak days = 60%
Peak days in season (PD) 28
Turnover rate per day (TR) 1.25
Persons per boat (PB) 3
Acres per boat (AB) 2

Formula

Water acres needed 90% of User Days x 60 x AB = 90% of User Days x 60% x 2
PD x TR x PB 28 x 1.25 x 3

90% of User Days x 120%
105

Standards - Water Skiing

Percent of participation 10%
Percent of participation occurring on peak days 60%
Peak Days in season (PD) 28
Turnover rate per day (TR) 2
Persons per boat (PB) 3
Acres per boat (AB) 5

Formula

Water acres needed 10% of User Days x 60% x AB = 10% of User Days x 60% x 5
PD x TR x PB 28 x 2 x 3

10% of User Days x 300%
168

The standards for water skiing should be applied only to inland bays and lakes as these areas
would best accommodate this activity. It must be assumed that Where water skiing is possible,
i.e., permitted by regulation and natural features, that ten percent of the available water area
will be so used. It should be noted that Delaware Laws prohibit water skiing on State-owned
impounded water areas.

Swimming

As was shown in the Demand Study, swimming of all types was among the most popular
outdoor recreation activities. The following standards are assumed to be relevant for swimming
in the ocean and bay.

15 See Notes and Sources of Standards (end of Needs Section)
16 See Notes and Sources of Standards (end of Needs Section)

Standards for Swimming Beaches (Ocean and Bay) 17

Percent of participation on peak days (P) 60%
Number of peak days (PD) 28
Turnover rate (TR) 3
Square feet of beach per user (SFB) 135
Safe distance from shore in water 25 feet
Maximum desired beach depth from water 200 feet

Formula

Beach area needed' User Days x (PD) x (SFB) = User Days x 60% x 135
(PD) x (TR) 28x3

User Days x 60%
84

Standards for Swimming Beaches (Ponds and Lakes) 17

Percent of participation on peak days (P) 60%
Number of peak days (PD) 28
Turnover rate (TR) 3
Square feet of deck area per user (SFD) 75
Square feet of water area per user (SFW) 50
Percent of users in water at one time (PW) 25%
Percent of users not in water (PNW) 75%

Formula

Beck area needed* = User Days x (P) x (PNW) x (SFD) User Days x 60% x 75% x 50
(PD) x (TR) 28 x 3

= User Days x 45% x 50
84

Water area needed* = User Days x (P) x (PW) x (SFW) User Days x 60% x 25% x 30
(PD) x RR) 28 x 3

= User days x 15% x 30
84

Number of pools = Water area needed
4,500 square feet per pool

*It should be noted that these standards for swimming activities give area needs in square feet.
They must be divided by 43,560 to obtain the number of acres needed. Parking area needs are
computed by determining the total peak day number of users (i.e., User Days x Percent
Participation) divided by the product of the turnover rate and the number of peak days, which
yields the instant capacity need in users. This is translated into number of vehicles by assuming
4.5 users per vehicle and into acreages by assuring 350 square feet per vehicle or 124.5 vehicles
per acre.

17 See Sources of Standards (end of Needs Section)

Golf Courses'18

According to projected changes in socio-economic characteristics, golf will become
increasingly more popular. Approximate total golf course needs can be calculated from the
following general standards:

a. Urban areas - one golf course per 36,000 people (18 holes) or one golf hole per 2,000
people.

b. Rural areas - one golf course per 54,000 people (18 holes) or one golf hole per 3,000
people.

c. Minimum acres needed for 18 holes = or ten acres per hole

d. Turnover rate = 2.5

e. Number of users at one time per 18 holes = 200
Fishing19

The following standards are used for fishing:

a. boat fishing - 1 acre of water surface per every 4 fishermen assuming 2 fishermen per boat
(2 anchored boats per acre)

b. stream, lake or pond from shore - 1 mile of shore per every 10 fishermen

c. boat launches at lakes, ponds and other impounded waters - one for every 300 acres or
fraction of water surface, having at least 15 acres of public access area and 750 feet of
water frontage per access

d. Use standards:

Number of peak days = 28
% of participation on peak days = 60%
turnover rate per day = 2

Hunting20

By its very nature, hunting is a rural area activity. Much of the projected decline in future
participation rates for this activity is, in fact, explained by the continued urbanization of the
State and the metropolitan region which reduces the amount of rural space.

18 See Sources of Standards (end of Needs Section)
19 See Sources of Standards (end of Needs Sectio 'n)
20 See Sources of Standards (end of Needs Section)

Since hunting involves a potential hazard, large areas per hunter are necessary. For this
reason the following standards have been used:

a. Controlled area of 300-500 acres to accommodate 50 hunters per every 4 acres or a total
capacity of 24-40 hunters at one time, a somewhat larger area should be allowed where
deer hunting is most popular.

b. Assumed season = 84 days

c. Turnover rate per day = 1

d. Participation evenly spread over entire season, i.e. = 84 peak days

Horseback Riding

As most of Delaware is rural in character, it is assumed that much of the participation in this
sport will take place in these rural areas on local roads or on agricultural lands. Further,
additional riding will be accommodated in some of the private country clubs in the northern
portion of the State. For the purposes of this report it is assumed that much of the total
demand will have to be accommodated in public areas. Bridle trails in public areas should be
separate from trails for walkers or access to other facilities. They should also avoid crossing
roadways and railroads and should not be located where unexpected or unusual noise or motion
could excite the horses. The bridle trail should be wide enough to accommodate at least two
horses side-by-side and for maintenance access and should provide areas where groups of up to
ten horses could stop. Finally, bridle areas should be located in areas having scenic value. The
followi-ng standards are used:21

Width of Trail 10 feet
Group Size 4 or 5
Length 1-5 miles
Turnover Rate 4
Enclosed Area 60 acres accommodates 4 groups

Nature Centers22

Capacity at one time, number of users 60
Turnover rate 3
Trails, time to traverse 1/2 to 1 hour each
Site area for center, minimum 2 acres
Hiking Trails23

Daily capacity 40 hikers / mile / day
Trails, time traverse = various times from 1/2 hour

21 See Sources of Standards (end of Needs Section)
22 See Sources of Standards (end of Needs Section)
23 See Sources of Standards (end of Needs Section)

Other Activities

Standards have not been included in this report for such winter sports as ice skating, snow
skiing, and tobogganing as the study has assumed that Delaware does not have the natural
resources to compete'with nearby areas for participants.

Standards are not included for pleasure riding and pleasure walking as these are hard to
quantify due to wide variations in individual participant taste. The same problem also exists for
vacation and weekend trips. For these activities this section will only recognize a demand which
must be accommodated in the plan portion of this report.

Notes and Sources of Standards

13. Picnicking - Standard from Nebraska Outdoor Recreation Plan, 1968, modified based on
findings of Park User Survey and Parks, Recreation and Forestry Division data.

14. Camping - Standard from Nebraska Outdoor Recreation Plan, 1968, Turnover rate
modified to reflect the assumption that camping is a two-day event, hence a turnover rate
per day of 1/2.

15. & 16. Boating - Boat Launch standard from U.S. Corps of Engineers Manual. EM 1130-2-312,
Washington, D.C., May 1, 1968, modified by Parks, Recreation and Forestry Division
data.

17. Swimming - Standards from Delaware Division of Parks, Recreation and Forestry.

18. Golf Course - Standard from Urban Land Use Planning, 2nd edition, F. Stuart Chapin, Jr.,
University of Illinois, Urbana, 1965, and Division of Parks, Recreation and Forestry.

19. Fishing - Boat fishing standard from Division of Parks, Recreation, and Forestry. Strearti
standard from Placer County, California, Recreation Commission. Boat launch standard
from Tennessee State Planning Commission.

20. Hunting - Standard from Soil Conservation Service, "Considerations for 7 categories of
Recreation, Book of Recreation Reference Part I I," Washington, D.C.

21. Horseback Riding - Standard from Louisiana Parks and Recreation Commission,
Louisiana Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan, Supplement 1, Baton
Rouge, La., August 10, 1966, modified by data from the Division of Parks, Recreation,
and Forestry.

22. & 23. Nature Centers and Hiking standards from Charles T. Main, Inc., Master Plan Report for
Lums Pond State Park, Division of Parks, Recreation and Forestry, State of Delaware.

RECREATION CAPABILITIES OF EXISTING AND PRIVATE FACILITIES

Methodology

The following section presents information on present capacities, by activity, for recreational
facilities provided by both the public and private sectors in Delaware. The method by which
these figures were derived for each activity is described below:

Picnicking - The total number of available picnic tables was tabulated based on a 1967
recreation inventory conducted by the State Planning Office. To determine the number of
people that could be accommodated in one day, the total number of tables was multiplied by
average family size (4.5) and by the rate of turnover (2). Figures for average family size and rate
of turnover were determined by user surveys conducted by the State Parks Commission and are
the same as the assumed standard for this activity.

Boating - Several methods were used to determine the capacity of facilities for boating. For
areas having berths, the number of these was multiplied by 3, the assumed average party size.
Where boat ramps were available, a Corps of Engineers standard of 40 boats per ramp per day
was used. In areas lacking either boat ramps or berths, a standard of 2 acres of water surface per
boat was applied, assuming a turnover rate of 1.25.

Camping - To determine the number of campers that could be accommodated in one day,
the number of campsites was multiplied by the.average family size, 4.5. Since camping is an
overnight activity, no daily turnover factor was applied. Figures for numbers of camp sites were
obtained from the 1967 recreation inventory.

Swimming (Pond) - The daily capacities for swimming in ponds were determined by
multiplying the number of existing parking spaces at a recreation area by 4.5 (average family
size), and applying a turnover factor of 3. In cases where no formal parking spaces exist, the
standard of 145 people per acre of beach was applied.

Swimming (Bay) - Capacities for swimming in the Bay were determined by multiplying
available parking spaces by average family size, assuming a daily turnover of 3.

Swimming (Ocean) - The daily number of participants in ocean swimming was calculated by
two methods. When the number of parking spaces for an area was known, the number of these
was multiplied by 4.5 (average family size) and a turnover factor of 3 was applied. In other
cases, a standard of 145 swimmers per acre of ocean beach was used, with a turnover factor of

Fishing - Capacities of areas for fishing were calculated using two methods. For salt water
areas, the number of available parking spaces was multiplied by 2 (the assumed participation
rate per vehicle), and a turnover factor of 2 was applied. For fresh water areas, capacities were
determined by applying a standard of 2 fishing boats per acre of water, with a turnover of 2 and
assuming 2 persons per boat.

Hunting - It is difficult to measure the total supply of land in the State available for hunting
purposes. There are many landowners who permit limited hunting on their farms, but the exact
number is difficult to ascertain. As noted in a later section, the number is decreasing. However,
based on information obtained in the 1967 survey, it is estimated that there are approximately
26,000 acres available for hunting. Using the standard of 50 acres per every 4 hunters,
approximately 2,313 hunters can presently be accommodated per day.

Present Capacities by Activity

Table 29 shows the present daily capacity for various recreational activities in both the
public and private sectors. These figures supply a basis for calculating present and future
deficiencies based on recreation needs. The data on the public sector includes areas administered
by the Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, State Highway
Department, New Castle County Parks and Recreation Commission, U.S. Department of the
Interior, and the municipalities in Delaware.

TABLE29

SUMMARY OF DAILY CAPACITIES
BY RECREATIONAL ACTIVITY, 1967
(No. of Persons)

Public Private Total for
Activity Sector Sector State

Picnicking 159778 7*361 23,139

Boating 29400 59500 79900

Camping 5,160 11,907 17,Q67

Swimming (Pond) 14,151 42218 18,369

Swimming (Bay) 5,860 159732 21,592

Swimming (ocean) 127,180 - 127,180

Fishing 11,564 89607 20,171

Hunting 2,080 233 2,313

Source: 1967 Recreation Inventory conducted by the Delaware State
Planning Office

Other Activities - -Daily capacities for other activities have not been included due to lack of
data. That does not mean that attention should not be given to these categories, merely that
deficiencies must be measured in subjective rather than absolute terms. General comments on
these activities are included in the next section, projected total need.

TOTAL PROJECTED NEED BY ACTIVITY

Picnicking

Using the standards for picnicking and the projected number of user days for this activity, it
is calculated that the total table need will be approximately 16,590 in 1980 and 23,165 in the
year 2000. Translated into land needs this means 1,276 acres of picnic tables in 1980 and 1,782
acres in the year 2000. These amounts would be adequate to accommodate the peak day users
during the assumed picnicking season. This acreage would also include parking areas and access.

Camping

Based on projected user days of 626,OUO in 1980 and 870,000 in the year 2000, a total of
925 acres and 1,290 acres will be needed respectively. This acreage would accommodate 4,635
camping units in 1980 and 6,445 units in the year 2000, assuming that 60% of the total
participation in this activity would occur on fourteen peak weekends during the summer. As
each camp unit is assumed to be comprised of 4.5 persons this means accommodations for
20,860 persons in 1980 and 29,000 persons in the year 2000.

Boating Needs

Water area needs - based on the 1980 and 2000 projected user days of 4,075,000 and
5,700,000 respectively and using the standards specified for boating, there will be a total need
for 41,900 acres in 1980 and 58,620 acres of water area in the year 2000 in order to satisfy
peak day demand. As the State presently owns or leases 2,894 acres of water, this means a total
need for 39,006 acres of water additionally in 1980 and 55,726 acres additionally in the year
2000. Some of this demand, however, will be met by the water area of the inland bays.
Nevertheless, additional water areas should be provided, especially fresh water ponds, in the
urban portions of the State. The plan portion of this report will evaluate potential locations for
meeting these needs.

Water skiing needs are computed from the assumption that ten percent of the total boating
demand will be for this activity. Therefore, the total user days in 1980and 2000 are 407,500
and 570,000 respectively. Based on the standards a total of 72,760 acres and 101,700 acres of
water will be needed in the two periods. Obviously this figure is of little value as the sport
occurs throughout the entire bay and inland bay areas and at probably less ideal conditions than
the standard implies. Nevertheless, the computation does allow for evaluation of boat launch
needs.

Boat launch needs are computed by determining the number of user per peak day which is
then divided by the number of people per boat. This yields the number of boats, which divided
by the daily boat launch capacity equals the number of launches needed. In 1900 and 2000
approximately 730 and 1000 launches will be needed respectively ' Many of these will not be
formal launching areas, however, they will be a high demand for location from which to launch
a boat. Land needed to meet these requirements will depend on the present supply of such
launches and on the ability of the grounds at each to allow sufficient parking for vehicles and
trailers (each ramp should have at least one acre of supporting ground for parking purposes and
launching - this area will support up to 60 vehicles and trailers including those loading and
unloading boats).

Pleasure Riding

Total need for pleasure riding cannot easily be expressed in terms of miles of road needed or
some other physical measure. However, the magnitude can be shown by calculation of the

number of peak day trips for this purpose. Assuming that 60 percent of the part icipation occurs
on peak days and that there are 40 peak days in a year (mostly Sundays and holidays in all
seasons except winter), the typical peak day participation will be: User Days Projected x 60%.
This calculation yields 326,290 users per peak day in 1980 and 456,075 in the year 2000. At
4.5 persons (participants) per vehicle this means that 72,509 vehicles in 1980 and 101,350
vehicles in 2000 will be pleasure riding on a peak day. If all of these vehicles were to use major
Delaware highways for this purpose, intolerable congestion could result. It is imperative, given
this demand, that "pleasure riding" roadway networks be developed so that major roads may
serve their primary function. These new routes could lead the pleasure rider through agricultural
areas to historic sites,. inland recreation areas, smaller communities, or other points of interest.

It should be noted that some of this demand will be deterred from participation as
congestion increases and as urbanization makes natural landscape less available for visual
pleasure. It is most important that the State does not attempt to satisfy this type of outdoor
recreation by large scale improvements to existing major highways, as such may negate both the
pleasure aspect and the traffic carrying function of the highway itself by directing the pleasure
rider into the already congested recreation areas.

Pleasure Walking

No standards exist for this activity, hence it is impossible to quantify the need for facilities
for its enjoyment. Nevertheless, this activity is projected to include 15,461 user days in 1980
and 21,620,000 user days in 2000. This is the third most popular outdoor recreation activity.
As most of this participation will occur in urban areas, the plan must provide for scenic
pathways, and intra-urban greenspaces, walkways and trails in the various parks, and natural
preservations in which persons may walk for pleasure.

Hun ting

As noted earlier in the standards section, hunting is basically a rural activity. Continued
urbanization and utilization of former woodlands and wetlands for residential or other purposes
will result in a future decline in hunting activity. In spite of this decline, user days are projected
at 507,000 in 1980 and 710,000 in the year 2000. Assuming a season of 84 days and at 50 acres
per every 4 hunters, over 75,434 acres will be needed in 1980 and over 97,135 acres will be
needed by the year 2000. Much of this need will be met by private sources, i.e., farms opened
for hunting by their owners or commercial forest holdings. However, State or Federal lands will
also be heavily used and additional lands may be required.

Horseback Riding

The 1980 and 2000 total user days for this activity are 685,000 and 960,000 respectively.
Assuming that 60 percent of the participation occurs on 28 peak days, this means a peak day
demand of 14,670 users in 1980 and 20,600 users in 2000. With a turnover rate of 4 on each
trail,- this means daily instant capacity need of 3,675 and 5,150 users in 1980 and 2000
respectively. This demand means a total need for 11,000 acres in 1980 and 15,450 acres in 2000
for this activity.

Fishing

Total user days of this outdoor recreation activity are projected at 1,747,000 in 1980 and
2,435,000 in the year 2000. Based on the standards for this activity it is assumed that 60
percent of this activity occurs on peak days and that there are 28 such peak days in a season.
Therefore, the average peak day will equal 37,435 fishermen in 1980 and 52,180 fishermen in
the year 2000.

Assuming further that 50 percent of these people fish from a boat and that the turnover rate
is 2 for all fishermen, the following instant capacity must be met in 1980:

a) Boat 37,435 x 50% 2 = 9,360 fishermen
b) Shore 37,435 x 50% 2 = 9,360 fishermen

The year 2000 demand is calculated as:

a) Boat = 52,180 x 50% + 2 = 13,045 fishermen
b) Shore = 52,180 x 50% -- 2 = 13,045 fishermen

Since Delaware has both fresh and salt water fishing areas, with the latter being especially
abundant, and since information on participation by type of water is not available, no
additional breakdowns have been made regarding this activity. Instead, the planning section will
determine instant capacity of each existing and proposed facility, and relate these to the total
demand.

One subsidiary calculation is necessary, however, that being the boat launch requirements
generated by fishermen using boats. Assuming 2.0 persons per boat, a turnover rate of 2 and a
maximum capacity of 40 boats per day per launch, the above boat fishing demands yield 9,360
boats and 13,045 boats in 1980 and 2000 respectively or 234 and 326 launches in the two
periods, At one acre of parking per boat launch, this means 234 and 326 acres of parking for the
two periods.

Swimming - Ocean

Total needs for swimming in the ocean can be calculated from the standards for this activity
and the projected user days. Using the following formula:

User Days x Percent on Peak Days
Number of Peak Days x Turnover rate
the instant capacity number of users can be computed.

The 1980 and 2000 user days for this activity are 9,251,000 and 12,940,000. These yield a need
for space for 65,540 users and 92,428 users at one time in 1980 and 2000 respectively At 135
square feet of beach per user the 1980 and 2000 space needs are 8,847,900 square feet and
12,477,780 square feet respectively. Further, at a maximum distance of 200 feet from the water
a total of 44,329 and 62,389 lineal feet of beach will be needed or a minimum of 8.4 and 11.8
miles of beach respectively. In terms of beach acres this demand requires 203 acres and 286
acres in 1980 and 2000 for ocean swimming use only.

Parking spaces for these participants will be a critical element regarding this activity.
Assuming that 60 percent of the participation occurs on peak days, and that there are 28 days,
and using a turnover factor of 3, a typical peak day will find 66,000 participants in 1980 and
92,400 participants in 2000. At 4.5 persons per vehicle this means a total of 14,650 vehicles in
1980 and 20,530 vehicles in 2000.

In order to accommodate these vehicles, 118 acres of parking will be needed in 1980 and
over 167 acres of parking in the year 2000, assuming 350 square feet per parking space. The
plan and individual park designs must carefully relate this need to road and beach accesses and
retention of the natural shoreline character of the beach areas.

Swimming - Bay

The projected user days for this activity are 3,396,000 and 4,740,000 for 1980 and 2000
respectively. Using the same standards as indicated for ocean swimming it is calculated that
24,257 users will have to be accommodated at one time in 1980 and 33,850 users in 2000. At
135 square feet of beach per user the respective space needs are 3 274,695 square feet of beach
and 4,569,750 square feet of beach. This equals 75 acres and ;05 acres in 1980 and 2000
respectively.

Accommodating this need should not pose any problem given Delaware's large bay areas
(Delaware Bay, Indian River Bay, Rehoboth Bay, and little Assawoman Bay). It is possible, in
fact, that the abundance of these areas could result in a shift in other swimming categories if
these should become relatively congested.

Parking requirements for this activity are estimated at 43 acres and 60 acres in 1980 and
2000 respectively.

Swimming - River

Few of Delaware's inland rivers, or the Delaware River itself, are suitable for swimming due
to pollution, lack of access, or condition of the river bed. Therefore, it is assumed that most of
these participants will use the inland bays where adequate water is available. The user days for
this activity have been included with swimming in a lake or pond.

Swimming - Lake, Pond and River

As the distinction between lakes and ponds is relatively insignificant in Delaware, the total
user days for these categories have been combined with those for swimming in a river. The total
user days, therefore, are 7,757,000 in 1980 and 10,830,000 in the year 2000. This activity is
projected as requiring 72 and 100 beach acres in 1980 and 2000 respectively. Because pond and
lake size is measured in terms of acres rather than miles of shoreline, the water area breakdown
is 15 acres in 1980 and 22 acres in 2000.

Parking requirements for this activity are projected at 99 acres in 1980 and 139 acres in the
year 2000 using 350 square feet per vehicle for parking and 4.5 persons per vehicle.

Swimming - Pool (Not at Home)

Assuming that 60 percent of the participation in this activity occurs on 28 peak days and a
turnover rate of 3, the projected instant capacity participants in 1980 and 2000 are 155,770
and 161,850 respectively. Of these, 75 percent will be using deck areas surrounding the pool,
and 25 percent will be in water. At 50 square feet of deck area per user the participants not in
the water will require 100 and 139 acres of deck surface in 1980 and 2000. The participants in
the water require 30 square feet of water each or a total of 868,290 square feet and 1,213,890
square feet in 1980 and 2000. At 45,000 square feet per pool this means 193 and 269 pools in
the two periods. At 4.5 participants per vehicle and 350 square feet per car these users (both in
and not in the water) will require 206 and 289 acres of parking in 1980 and 2000 respectively.

Winter Sports - Ice Skating, Toboganning, and Snow Skiing

This study assumes that most of the participation in these sports will occur in neighboring
states as the State's natural resources are not suited to such activities. Ice skating, the most
"local" of the winter sports should require few major facilities at the State level since Delaware
abounds in small ponds and stremas whose frozen surfaces should suffice. Ice skating areas may,
however, be an appropriate extra at some State parks.

Vacation and Weekend Trips

These outdoor recreational activities do not easily lend themselves to application of
standards or calculation of need. It is assumed that the impact of these activities will be felt
most in the private sector as demand for motels, hotels, restaurants, and commercial
amusements. It is further assumed that the recreational needs of these participants, whose
primary trip purpose is sightseeing, will be relatively minor from the State standpoint and will
be satisfied by commercial and municipal parks, playgrounds, swimming pools, and similar
facilities.

Golfing

It is assumed that facilities needed for this activity will largely be provided by local, public
and private golf courses, and that State involvement will be limited. No calculation of need has
been made; however, interested readers are referred to the demand study which indicates
projected total user days for this sport. Golf courses may be included in certain state parks if
these facilities seem appropriate to the overall development program and the availability of
private facilities. Where included, however, they will have low priority.

Other Uses

Standards are included for native centers and for hiking trails, however, no computation of
need has been made. These standards are useful for specific design applications and will be
utilized wherever the facility seems appropriate in the development of an outdoor recreation
facility.

TABLE30

SUMMARY OF PROJECTED NEEDS BY ACTIVITY
TO MEET PEAK DAY DEMAND

Activity 1980 2000

Picnicking
Tables 16%590 23,165
Acres of Land 1,276 1,782
Acres of Parking** (133) (186)

Camping
Units 49635 69445
Acres of Land 925 1,290
Users 209860 299000

Boating
Water Acres 41,900 58,620
Launches 730 1,000
Acres of Parking 582 814

Pleasure Ridi@g
# of Vehicles 72,509 101,350

Pleasure Walking

TABLE 30 (Continued)

Activity 1980 2000

Hunting
Acres of Land 759434 97,135

Horseback Riding
Acres of'Land 11,000 15,450

Fishing
From Boat Fishermen 99360 139045
From Shore Fishermen 99360 139045
# Boat Launches 234 326
Acres of Parking 234 326

Swiming - Ocean
Acres of Beach 203 286
Miles of Beach 8.4
Parking Acres 118 167

Swimming - Bay
Acres of Beach 75 105
Parking Acres 43 60

Swimming - Lake & Pond
Acr es of Land 72 100
Parking Acres 99 139
Acres of Water 15 22

Swimming - Pool (Not at Home)
# of Pools 193 269
Acres of Parking 206 289

Winter Sports

Vacation & Weekend Trips

Golfing

Total Acres of Land & Beach 89,118 1169334
Total Acres of Water 41,915 589642
Total Acres of Parking 1,282 1,795
Total Number of Boat Launches 964 1,326

Total needs not calculated - see text
Picnicking - acres of parking included in total acres of land for this
activity

TABLE 30 (Continued)

Source: Delaware State Planning Office calculation based on findings
of demand study and assumed standards

Note: All needs shown are mutually exclusive as to actual incidence of
participation. It is possible that a user may participate in more
than one activity during a day (i.e., camping and fishing), however,
the incidence of participation is assumed to be separate and is
reported separately.

OUTDOOR RECREATION NEEDS, DEFICIENCIES

Preceeding sections of this report have presented the capacity of existing facilities and the
projected total need based on the demand study. The findings of these sections have been
translated into peak day users for eight categories of outdoor recreation activity.

As can be seen from Table 31, significant capacity deficiencies are noted for both 1980 and
2000 in each of the eight categories. These deficiencies range from over 185,000 users for
picnicking in the year 2000 to less than 5,500 users for hunting in the same year.

The impact of these deficiencies in peak day user capacities w ill have to be evaluated in the
plan section of this project. Policy decisions will have to be made regarding the State's ability to
fully meet this need and the areas of the State which would have priority. Additional decisions
will be necessary for the categories which have not been included.

In some cases, the State may wish to adopt a policy of not providing the facilities in order to
avoid conflicts with the role of the private sector. In others, a deliberate policy of discouraging
participation may be necessary or desirable.

The need is readily apparent from the findings of this study. With or without facilities, much
of the projected participation will occur. Without facilities, much of the quality and natural
value of the present resources may be lost, Will proper action at the Slate and at other levels,
the need may be met consistent with the preservation of the State's limited natural resources.

Because some of the activities are user-oriented as to the location of the participation, it is
possible to assign some of the projected deficiencies to areas smaller than the State.
User-oriented activities include picnicking, pleasure walking, fishing, hunting, swimming in pool,
golfing, and horseback riding. For these activities, the participant usually travels less than 25
miles from his home, hence the need is concentrated in direct proportion to residential
concentration.

If an "urban" concentration can be assumed in a portion of the State, needs in these
activities can be geographically refined. For the purpose of this paper, the Wilmington
Metropolitan Area as delineated in the Preliminary Comprehensive Development Plan will be
used as the "urban" concentration. This area is projected to have 477,000 residents in 1980 or
66.7 percent of the total State population. Hence, it is assumed that for user-oriented activities,
66.7 percent of the need will also be concentrated here.

TABLE31

PROJECTED DAILY CAPACITY DEFICIENCIES BY ACTIVITY'
FOR YEARS 1980 and 2000
STATEWIDE

(No. of Persons)
Present 1980 2000
Daily Capacities Peak Day Capacities Peak Day
Activity Capacitiesi Neededl Deficiency Neededl Deficiency
Picnicking2 23,139 1499314 126,175 2089500 185,361

Boating 79900 16,052 8,152 22,500 142600

Camping 171JO67 209860 39793 299000 11,933

Swimming (Pond) 18,369 389331 199962 51,660 339291

Swimming (Bay) 219592 729771 51,179 101,550 799958 CD

Swimming (ocean) 127,180 1989000 705820 2279200 100,020

Fishing 20,171 379440 179269 52,180 329009

Hunting3 29313 69035 39722 79770 59457

Source: 1967 Recreation Inventory Conducted by Delaware State Planning Office.

1 Capacity shown is daily capacity which is the number of users in one peak day. This
should not be conf-used with instant capacity which is the number of users at one time
during the day.
2 Excludes many privately owned picnic areas and numerous informal areas not having
picnic tables.
3 These figures are somewhat misleading, since they do not include many privately
owned farms where hunting is permitted on a restricted basis.

A population projection for this area is not available for the year 2000; however, this report
assumes that: (a) the area will continue to be the most developed portion of the State through
2000; (b) the proportion of total State population will decline slightly due to urban
development in other portions of the State; and (c) the proportion of State population in 2000
will approximate 60 percent. Therefore, based on these assumptions 60 percent of the need for
user-oriented activities will be located in the Wilmington Metropolitan area'

The following Tables (32 and 33) represents the application of these assumptions to the
projected total capacity needs.

Unfortunately, recent capacity data is lacking for the urban area for all of the categories of
user-oriented activities. Only picnicking, fishing, and hunting capacities are available, and these
only reflect the public sector. Using the available date the following apparent deficiencies in
terms of people capacity can be calculated:

Some comments are necessary, however, regarding Table 33. First, it is known that a number
of private facilities provide for much of the picnicking and fishing need: and that informal use
of private property is also common place along the many streams in the urban area. Therefore,
the projected deficiencies are somewhat misleading. Second, while a major hunting deficiency is
noted, it must be assumed that due to a shortage of land suited and open for hunting, many of
the participants travel outside the area. Hence, hunting in the urban Delaware case is more of a
resource-oriented than user-oriented activity. Therefore, the apparent deficiency is relevant only
to the degree that hunting is assumed to be user-oriented. It is the opinion of this report that
the apparent deficiency in this case is also misleading, as sufficient hunting areas do exist
outside the urban area and within a reasonable travel distance and time.

This brings up a major problem with a study of this type. Methods of collecting complete
data on the capacities of privately provided facilities are not sufficiently developed to allow the
continuation of needs analyses at a small geographic level. As this problem cannot be overcome
within the time frame of this report, this project must assign the plan section the task for
showing that the facilities provided by the State help to meet a need, for which a portion of the
responsibility may lie with lower levels of government and the private sector.

The State must take the lead in establishing procedures for compilation of the necessary
data. It is hoped that this lead will be established and the necessary data collected prior to the
next updating of the outdoor recreation plan.

101

TABLE32

URBAN AREA DAILY CAPACITY NEEDS, 1980 AND 2000
(No. of Persons)

1980 2000
User-Oriented State Urban Urban State Urban Urban
Activities Need Factor Need Need Factor Need

Picnicking 1499314 66.7% 991548 2089500 60.0% 125,100 CN

Fishing 371440 66.7 249968 52,180 60.0 31,310

Hunting 69035 66.7 49025 7,770 60.0 4,670
Swimming in Pool 1559770 66.7 1039850 161,850 60.0 (a) 103,850

Horseback Riding 149670 66.7 972804 209600 60.0 1239600

(a) Application of a 60% to the 2000 demand for pool swimming would result in an urban need
of 97,110, however, it is assumed that regardless of the trend of urbanization in the
rest of the State, the urban demand would be at least as great in 2000 as in 1980.

TABLE33

URBAN PORTION OF DELAWARE
OUTDOOR RECREATION NEEDS, 1980 2000
(SELECTED ACTIVITIES)

Activity 1980 2000

Picnicking
Need
Capacity (present) 9,800 9,800
Deficiency

Fishing
Need 24,968 31,310
Capacity (present) 1,460 1,460
Deficiency 23,508 29,850

Hunting
Need 4,025 4,670
Capacity (present) 296 296
Deficiency 3,729 4,374

103

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
104 I
I

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I ANALYSIS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I 105

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
106 I

THE QUALITY ASPECTS OF OUTDOOR RECREATION

Many of the qualities which contribute to the enjoyment and importance of outdoor
recreation facilities cannot be measured by dollars, user capacities, or other tangible units. These
abstract intangible qualities, which are so often overlooked, have significant value in a
comprehensive outdoor recreation plan.

The demand for outdoor recreation facilities cannot totally be met by the provision of large
areas of undeveloped land, nor can it be totally met by the intensive development of smaller
areas into ballfields, picnic tables, concessions, and parking lots.

The word "recreation" literally means re-creation, a restoration of the psychological as well
as the physiological well-being. There must also be the quite place, the sense of belonging to a
natural order, and the place for recognition of our natural and cultural heritage. Hence, a plan
for outdoor recreation must give consideration to the aesthetic values just as it must consider
the functional value of these natural and scenic resources. Both values need protection and
preservation through a careful and important role in the planning process.

Natural resources such as forest and unaltered waterways provide a welcome psychological
relief from the over-paved, over-utilized character of our urban areas. These same areas provide
opportunities for hunting, fishing, camping, and hiking activities, all of which provide links with
our national heritage.

Coastal marshlands, which provide visual character and a sense of remoteness to the
landscape, also serve as spawning grounds for fish, habitat for migratory waterfowl, shelter for
small wildlife, and the sources of food essential to shell fish and other marine life. Once
destroyed through indescriminate filling, this ecological chain and the aesthetic character are
irrevocably lost.

Destruction of the wetlands, coupled with filling in of natural drainage have further impacts.
Not only are these areas lost from visual enjoyment, but their loss greatly increases the risk of
flooding. Furthermore, these aquifer recharge areas which should have been protected have been
covered with streets, parking lots, and homes. The results are inadequate ground water supplies
and further disruption of the ecological system.

The protection of wildlife resources for nature study, sport hunting, and biological reasons is
heavily dependent on the existence of natural areas. Specific kinds of natural habitats are
required by various types of wildlife; a prime goal of a comprehensive planning program must be
the preservation of this wildlife and of its natural habitat for the enjoyment of present and
future generations.

Man-made elements and resources which are significant to man's history also have inherent
qualitative value. Many of these elements, such as canals, old ports, early powder and flour
mills, wooden and iron bridges, and ruins of early industry, may provide a physical link vvith the
industrialization of past eras. Similarly, the homes of statemen, inventors, artists, and others
provide a link with the history of the State. This aspect is especially significant in Delaware due
to its role in the revoluntionary history of the nation and Delaware's place as "The First State."
These areas and other possessing prehistoric, scientific and architectural value are likely to be
lost to the pressure of development unless they are specifically preserved for future generations.

107

Still other areas provide qualitative values in an even less measurable sense. These "breathing
spaces" may be little more than a small wooded area or a linear park or a conserved stream
valley. In each case, however, an opportunity is created whereby people can escape momentarily
the momentum of daily life. In other cases, an opportunity exists to identify with a particular
community or neighborhood when such spaces serve as separators. In still other cases, these
spaces can serve in conjunction with another resource, na 'tural or man-made, making that
resource more enjoyable by emphasizing the visual qualities of that resource within its urban
context.

However, beyond the physical aspects of a park, a forest, or another facility there is the need
fo preserve the quality of the total environment. The setting for outdoor recreation includes not
only the land but also the resources of the air and the water. The quality of the outdoor
recreation experience is directly related to the population of the air or the water, the littering of
the landscape, the obstruction of the view, and the relative attractiveness of the man-made
improvements.

If the outdoor recreation experience is to be pleasanti the waters by which or in which
water-related activities occur must be pure, the air surrounding the participant in any activity
must be free of harmful or distracting pollutants, and the grounds on which the activity occurs
must be free of trash and other discards of our urban society. Furthermore, the natural
landscape must be visible rather than hidden by unregulated signs or camoflauged by poorly
arranged factories, homes, or businesses. It is critical that in the desire to meet activity needs the
broader scale relationships and needs must not be overlooked.

These qualitative values must be carried through the outdoor recreation plan in order that
elements possessing such characteristics may be given proper recognition. The meeting of need
only in a physical sense may "cost" society more in the long run than a less ambitious but more
responsible des@ire to meet the total need, whether that need is physical or psychological or
environmental.

It is worthy of note that this aspect of outdoor recreation was the underlying purpose of the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1970. This act declares a national policy to be
implemented through federal, state, and local actions to: encourage productive and enjoyable

damage to the environment and biosphere; and to enrich the understanding of the ecological
harmony between man and his environment; to promote efforts which will prevent or eliminate

systems and natural resources of the Nation. This act recognizes that man has too long and too
casually abused the landscape and the environment.

The State of Delaware has also recognized this record as the 1970 "Future of the State"
message of Governor Russell W. Peterson by a major committment to combat pollution of the
environment and to protect, develop and enjoy the State's natural resources. This Outdoor
Recreation Plan is dedicated to these vital goals.

108

AN OPEN SPACE SYSTEM

INTRODUCTION AND DELINEATION

Urbanization, a continuing facet of our modern industrialized society, each year consumes
vast amounts of land which formerly were pasture, woods, farmland, or marsh habitat. The
competition for space to accommodate this growth is of great importance given the limited,
irreplaceable character of the commodity.

In one sense of the term, open space is all land, urban or rural, which has not been
developed. This connotation is incorrect, however, because experience clearly shows that
yesterday's "open space -- i.e., undeveloped land" is today's shopping center or subdivision.
Open spaces should be a viable, planned element, not just land which has been inadvertently left
undeveloped.

Open space is essential to man's physical and psychological well-being, to the protection of
the ecological balance, to the conservation of significant natural resources, and to the creation
of an efficient land use structure. Open spaces provide for recreational pursuits of both an active
and passive nature at local, county, and regional scales. Open spaces add to the value of
surrounding development, encourage tourism, and provide outlets for man's energy and an
escape from urban tensions. These areas also protect water supplies, reduce the damages of
unchecked runnoff, provide habitat for fish and wildlife, and protect geologic, botanic, and
zoologic resources for the use and enjoyment of present and future generations. Finally, they
allow for delineation of neighborhoods and communities, provide visual relief from the intensity
of urban development, and help to separate and screen incompatible land uses.

The need for open space planning and action is imperative. It takes a minimum of .200 years
to repair the loss of one inch of topsoil due to erosion. It takes 100 years to replace a forest. No
amount of time or money could replace destroyed wetlands. Further, the loss of habitat can
cause the loss or severe reduction in an entire species or mammals, fish, or birds. Aside from
these ecological arguments, these wetlands are also part of our coastal scenery. Continued diking
and filling and development will forever ruin that attractiveness.

The Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan outlines an open space system to serve the
residents of the State of Delaware to the year 2000. The proposed system is intended to provide
contrast to urban development, to provide for outdoor recreational pursuits, to preserve natural
and historic resources, and to give direction to future urban development. The open space
system includes recreation facilities, conservation areas, forests, highways, agricultural land,
flood plains, and other open land. Recreation facilities include local recreation areas, state parks
and forests, facilities of the Division of Fish and Wildlife, roads, and roadside rest areas.
Agricultural land in the system includes only those farming areas which are necessary to fulfill
the goals of the system. Resource lands include State forests; wildlife refuges; borrow pits; and
lakes, ponds, and flood plains. These resource lands also include, wherever possible, sites of
significant prehistoric and geologic value as well as the locations of houses and other buildings
providing historical insight and pleasure.

It is important at this point to indicate that this open space system does not preclude
clevelopment__Rat@Lrjt indicates those areas where unregulated strip,,Iyp
_f@ r!@@iclential and other
de-ve.I.QpM beauty, to long-range property
.qqyy@@i4!g!, be seriously I
case in point is t e in a'
values, and to the h- I' -d
JtL type c
I Drofitable to the owners and in the short-run to, t@e oda'
_qqv@Mmp,n!,,wouId, even top cjI y@eacl to the loss ,of the - na,t-uIral be autry t;6. e_s,e,,w.ate rways 'One jo f
adjacent ev'ielop" 1- 1
the factors currently adding to thoJ@,ya_ue_apd, t at of""""' d"' meft' Fbiifi_&:-ihi@
dev6 opmen't'Would increase th@e' amount of nutrients in t e wate"r' cl-u7ie' tio- i'n-c`r-e'a_1sed ru noff and
private on-site sewage treatment as well as increased pollution from boats. These actions could
result in a waterway filled with algae and sediment which would be unsafe to swim in, take fish
or shellfish from, or use for water sports.

109

Development in the open space system should be clustered with considerable portions of the
development left in its natural state. The benefits of this approach are shared by the county, the
developers, and the owner. Valuable open spaces are preserved for the aesthetic and ecologic
value of all, while the developer and the owner recognize a greater value from the development
both in terms of the marketability of a "natural setting" and the reduction in road and utility
costs attributable to clustering.

The open space system has been delineated in accordance with the goals, objectives, and
policies outlined earlier and is based upon the following criteria:

1. Include areas of unique botanical, geological, ecological, historic, or prehistoric character
when the loss of these areas would diminish the natural heritage.

2. Conserve river, bay, and interior wetlands where these are important for fish and wildlife
or for protection of the ecological survival of water areas.

--J 3. Protect the watersheds and banks of major rivers and other water sources.

4. Develop wherever possible lineal open spaces; where lineal systems are not practical,
develop large unitary open spaces of sufficient size to add character to the area, protect
the natural resource, and provide for recreational use.

5. Perpetuate the right of unrestricted public use of the State's valuable bay and ocean
waters and shores.

The delineation included analysis of the extent of wetlands; the location and quality of
woodlands; the water courses, ponds, and inland bays; soil characteristics; the distribution and
quality of historic and prehistoric sites; and the projected pattern of urban development and
transportation. This resource data was developed through contacts with various State agencies;
analysis of geological survey maps; review of published State, county, and community studies
and plans; and field inspection of present conservation and recreation facilities and areas which
appear to have open space value.

It is designed to be implemented by State, county, local, and private acquisitions and
developments in a manner which preserves the open space values, provides outdoor recreation,
and results in a viable open space system.

WATER BODIES AND WETLANDS

Water, whether in a small stream or contained by an impoundment structure or part of an
inland bay, constitutes the major element in the open space system. Water areas have a special
scenic value not matched by many other natural resources. They also have recreational potential
for fishing, water skiing, boating, swimming, and taking of shellfish. Finally, and most
importantly, these areas are part of an ecological system essential for man's survival.

Directly related to the water areas are wetlands and the stream valleys. The areas
immediately surrounding water are vital for reduction of flood risks, for protection of the
waterways and for wildlife habitat. They also provide for recreational pursuits including hiking,
picnicking, and nature study, as well as providing for the access necessary for enjoyment of the
water areas.

,-D!@@, Plan. proposed.p,p@@servation it either through, acquisition.,.or,.regulations,, of.all waterape@as
and their's'ir'eam' v`aii eys and wetlands. The-ar-0oupt.,of. Ian
d,t9.,,@q,-pr9tected will vary depending
chafactee 6f`iKi-li@d' 'a@'n-a the nature of surrounding development. t'may range r m
0@'Afi*6' 0
serve'ral-huh-dredf6et -i'n urban areas to several miles in tidal marshes.

110

All significant streams in northern New Castle County have been included in the system
because of the high degree of urbanization in this area. The major streams in this system are the
White Clay Creek, Red Clay Creek, Brandywine Creek, Christiana River, and Chesapeake and
Delaware Canal. The shoreline of the Delaware River has little open space value in this area
although the River itself provides contrast to development in the City of Wilmington.

In lower New Castle County, the River and Bay snore should be preserved, particularly south
of Port Penn. The streams in this area should be preserved as well as the shorelines of all major
ponds. A significant area is formed south and east of Middletown by Silver Lake, Noxontown
Pond, and the St. Andrews School property.

The entire Delaware Bay area in Kent County should be protected. The marshes in this area
are extremely important to migrating waterfowl in the Atlantic Flyway. The marshes are
valuable, not only in terms of waterfowl, but as part of a complete ecological system. The
vegetation in the marshes, the waterfowl, and the many forms of aquatic life in the Bay are all
interdependent. Changes in the marshes can directly affect the fish population. Preservation of
the marsh areas involves limiting development to those uses not harmful to wildlife.

In Sussex County, all major streams leading into the Bay should be preserved as well as the
shoreline of the inland bays, the Nanticoke River, and the numerous small ponds and lakes.
Development along these water areas should be strictly controlled to guard against pollution, to
aid in watershed management, and to provide recreational facilities.

WOODLANDS

Woodlands also play an important part in completing the ecological cycle, in providing for
visual satisfaction, in sheltering wildlife, and in providing recreational potential. While it is not
possible or necessarily desirable to preserve all forested areas, sufficient woodlands should be
preserved to perpetuate these values. Without forest cover the land would not be very inviting
for recreation, nor would it be of great value for the protection of wildlife and protection of
water supplies.

The open space system encompasses large wooded tracts in all three counties for the above
purposes and for forest manaqement practices.

URBAN DEVELOPMENT

The open space system must reflect the present and expected pattern of urban development
during the plan period, as one purpose of the open space system is to guide this growth and add
to its value. The proposed system was developed with due consideration of urbanization as this
could be determined from present land use and from various studies and plans. Where urban
development was foreseeable, the system provides for the incorporation of all significant natural
resources as well as certain man-made features in open space uses. Typical of these are many of
the stream valley spaces in New Castle County and the preservation of the Nanticoke River and
its tributaries in the lower part of the State.

Urban development also contributes to recreational needs, and the facilities necessary for
meeting these needs should be part of the overall system. By careful location of facilities,
linkages or green pathways may be developed to connect the recreational facility with its
potential users. Further, the recreational area is in turn more satisfying and effective in its
natural surrounding.

111

Urban development necessitates roadway systems and these can be made to complement an
open space system and vice versa. At the intersections of these systems opportunities can be
presented for roadside rest areas, picnic sites, and even boat launches. They could also serve as
beginning points for hiking and other open space activities. Finally, the roadway system itself
may provide for open space benefits if it provides a break with urban development, gives access
to an area of scenic or recreational value, or is designed to allow for pleasure riding as well as
traffic movement.

Roadways may have a negative environmenal impact if poorly planned, especially if they
transverse areas of scenic or historic value or if their design fails to consider their aesthetic
significance. Proper design and consideration of the environment, as called for in Public Law
89-670 which governs the Federal aid highway program, can preserve the natural beauty, can
open rather than close scenic vistas, and can provide a visual link between segments of the open
space system. Such design as evidenced on portions of 1-95 in Wilmington can also improve the
recreation experience by providing seating areas, play areas and even a swimming pool under the
elevated roadway. If nothing else, appropriate landscaping along the roadway can introduce
some sense of green spaces within an otherwise drab urban setting.

The State recognizes this relationship and provides for the continued coordination of
highway planning, through the State Planning Office, with other state plans and programs
including outdoor recreation and environmental protection.

Agricultural lands and other relatively open type uses may also be part of the total open
space system. In certain areas farms have been included as a part of the planned open space in
order to create continuous systems. The inclusion of these lands does not imply public
acquisition. Rather, as long as the land is used for farm activities, it is compatible with the plan;
however it should be protected from loss by techniques such as acquisition of development
rights and zoning.

Special type uses which have open space value include the Greater Wilmington Airport, the
Dover Air Force Base, most educational complexes, the Georgetown Airport, the-State's Mental
Health facilities, and the various governmental complexes. An example of the relationship of
these uses and the maximum enjoyment of the open space system can be found in Dover.
Beginning with Delaware State College and Dover High School at the north end of Silver Lake,
the system includes the lake, a city recreational area, a park as part of Dover Middle School and
the Murphy School, the capital complex, and the new Highway Department Headquarters. Each
of these uses gains from the open spaces created by the Lake and the St. Jones River. Likewise,
the open space system is augmented by the green areas within these uses and by the visual
interest and interruption of these more active uses. This kind of interrelation of open spaces and
open uses allows for pursuit of solitude or for conduct of business in a variable, satisfying
environment.

112

FIGURE 20
DELAWARE OPEN
SPACE PLAN

EXISTING PUBLIC OPEN SPACE
(FEDERAL, STATE, & LOCAL)

PLANNED OPEN SPACE

4 6 6
@SZAIE IN MILES

SPECIAL PROBLEMS

FLOODPLAINS, WETLANDS AND THE SHORE

Floods are a natural and normal occurrence. Typically, a stream or other watercourse will
occupy a portion of its floodplain area every 2 or 3 years, with greater occupancy at less
frequent intervals, and substantial occupancy at least once every 100 years. The extent of this
occupancy depends on rainfall and on the extent of natural and man-made conditions in the
floodplain. The natural conditions include soils, topography, drainage patterns and geology. The
man-made conditions include various land uses, changes in drainage and runoff factors, and
physical structures for crossing the watercourse.

Before the spread of urbanization such flooding was accepted as natural, and it was
recognized that eventually the water would recede and the floodlands would be dry and useful
again for rural pursuits. However, as urbanization proceeded, these lands were increasingly
encroached upon for residential and other uses. Floodplains were filled in, paved over, or built
on without regard to the periodic flood hazard and the inherent danger to life and property.
Instead of adjusting the land uses permitted within floodplains to the needs of the watercourse,
the practice quite commonly has been to permit all types of development in the floodplain thus
bringing the natural needs of the streams into conflict with man.

An example of this conflict is noted in a recent study by the U.S. Corps of Engineers on the
Christina River, which has exceeded its banks 59 times in the last 25 years. Yet, in a number of
instances development has occurred in floodplains between these floods with resultant damages
to home@and improvements.

Floods have also occurred in other parts of the State, many in conjunction with storms along
the shore. Many of these floods inundate communities located in from the coast. A storm in
March of 1962 not only seriously damaged the coast, but also resulted in the flooding of towns
more than eight miles inland. Most of the damages incurred in these towns were to structures
and improvements built inappropriately in floodplains.

In addition to the inconvenience, hardship, danger, economic loss, and heartaches caused to
occupants of the floodplain, floodwaters also cause disruption of utility and transportation
services, health and safety hazards, damage to industries, businesses, residences, and agricultural
activities, and other economic losses.

Yet, these flood prone areas could have been used for many outdoor recreational activities
with little risk. Not only could they have been reserved for fishing, picnicking, and hiking, they
also could have served as natural buffers between adjacent developments and provided visual
relief from the surrounding urban development.

The same kinds of problems are noted in regard to the shore and its wetlands. Unregulated
development of these areas has been largely detrimental to their natural character with
repercussions on wildlife. The intrusion of man in an active sense interrupts, disturbs, and often
destroys the wetlands and their ecology.

Wildlife of many varieties require undisturbed natural feeding, shelter, and procreation areas
for their survival. Dredging, filling, grading, and clearing of wetlands and shore areas disturb
stream and bay bottoms, destroy the natural setting, reduce the water quality, and increase the
risk of serious flooding due to the lack of barrier dunes or the removal of floodplains. Many of
these actions are detrimental to wildlife, most include a potential hazard to man, and all remove
the natural setting from public enjoyment.

114

Large tidal marshes are evident along most of the Delaware Bay shore and substantial
wetlands exist along the shores of the Rehoboth and Indian River Bays. Yet all these areas are in
danger of being lost to intense land uses. Examples of this pressure are the filling and
development of large wetland areas in the Little Assawoman Bay at Bethany Beach and Fenwick
Island. Similar development has occurred in Rehoboth Bay and Indian River Bay.

Other activities have resulted in reduction of the natural dunes. In more than one instance,
homes have been built on these dunes, and in other cases the dunes have been removed to give
residential developments an unrestricted ocean view.

If such widespread practices are allowed to continue, then further destruction of the
shoreline and the wetlands will occur. This will inevitably result in severe deterioration of the
total ecology of the Delaware coastal area and will result in the loss of a vital section of the
State's outdoor recreation system.

According to a 1965 survey of coastal wetlands conducted by the Fish and Wildlife Service
of the U.S. Department of the Interior, in the decade 1954-1964, wetland losses in Delaware
accounted for 4,560 acres, or approximately four percent of the total 120,000 acres of wetlands
in existence in 1954. Twenty-six percent of the areas lost were rated as having high or moderate
value for waterfowl. Other areas lost had high value for fish and marine life.

The major causes of wetland loss included deposit of spoil from harbor dredging projects;
construction of bridges, roads, and parking; industrial and residential use; marina and dock
construction; waste disposal; and mosquite control. Less than two percent of the total loss was
used for recreational uses -- a rather poor record.

Losses were most concentrated in New Castle County where large scale road construction
and industrialization are most evident, and in Sussex County where resort-oriented housing
construction is significant. The impact of these losses in New Castle is important due to the
rapid urbanization of the County and the shortage of suitable land for recreational and
conservation purposes. The impact in Sussex County is largely felt from a wildlife and
waterfowl standpoint. Much of the destroyed wetlands were formerly the breeding areas for a
wide variety of fish and crustaceans, as well as nesting areas for waterfowl in the Atlantic
Flyway. In Kent County the loss was relatively minimal; however, it should be noted that most
of the protected wetlands are in this County.

According to the Division of Fish and Wildlife, the rate of loss in recent years has averaged
about one percent per year or approximately 1,200 acres. At this rate, by the year 2000 another
30 percent of the coastal wetlands (36,000 acres) would be permanently lost. It should be
apparent that preservation of these wetlands is a prime need in the Outdoor Recreation Plan.

The need for action in saving some of these wetlands resulted in a special study of Rehoboth,
Indian River, and Assawoman Bays by a special task force of natural resources agencies and the
Planning Office at the urging of Governor Russell W. Peterson. The study documents the need
for preserving and enhancing Delaware's valuable inland bays. It includes sections on the
geology of the area, biological characteristics of the bays, land use trends, and water quality.
The final section of the report consists of recommendations on how the bays can best be
protected from over-development in the future. Agencies participating inthe study were the
State Game and Fish Commission, State Parks Commission, State Planning Office, State Water
and Air Resources Commission, University of Delaware Marine Laboratories, and the Delaware
Geological Survey.

115

Significant findings of this important study included evidence of the biological decay of
these resources, the extent of development pressure upon their shorelines@ and the record of
recent applications for dredging. The impact on these resources is graphically portrayed in the
following maps, figures 21 and 22.

Specific recommendations of this study include:

1 . The State should initiate a program to acquire strategic portions of the shorelines along
the Rehoboth, Indian River and Assawoman Bays. As mentioned earlier, areas desirable
for purchase have been delineated by the State's natural resource agencies, and methods
of financing such acquisitions are being studied The State should also encourage private
resource preservation groups to acquire land in the bay areas.

2. Legislation should be prepared immediately by the Department of Natural Resources and
Environmental Control, in conjunction with the State Planning Office and affected
agencies, which would authorize State control of private as well as public subaqueous
lands. Such legislation should quarantee just compensation to any landowner restricted in
the use of his land.

3. An immediate moratorium should be declared on the State's plan to dredge the creek
bottoms in the bay areas, until more of the effects on the total ecology can be
determined.

4. The Sussex County Levy Court should adopt the land development controls contained in
the zoning ordinance being prepared by the State Planning Office. This would ensure
limited construction in the danger zone surrounding the bays, where over-pumping of
wells could result in salt-water encroachment. It would also preserve geologic features
such as dune lines, which hinder erosion. In addition, the regulations of the Department
of Natural Resources and Environmental Control governing spacing of septic tanks should
be enforced to control contamination of ground water.

5. A study should be conducted to determine the effects of siltation resulting from drainage
ditches.

6. The Sussex County Levy Court should continue its efforts to institute regional sewage
treatment plants. Additional sanitary districts similar to that established in the Dewey
Beach-Lewes area should be established, in order to provide the County with a
coordinated system for protecting its natural water resources.

7. A salt-water fishing license for both fin fish and shellfish should be established, with
appropriate enforcement procedures. Such a license would help pay for the maintenance
and management of our aquatic resources.

8. Present conflicting laws pertaining to fishing in tidal waters of Delaware should be
replaced with regulations based on sound management practices.

9. A Marine Fisheries Unit should be created within the State conservation agency. The
functions of this unit would include periodic inventory of stocks of fin fish and shellfish,
issuance of I icenses and permits, and enforcement of marine laws.

116

REHOBOTH FIGURE 21
INDIAN RIVER
&
ASSAWOMAN BAY
1938

EXISTING DEVELOPMENT

MARSHLAND

RURAL REHOBOTH
BEACH

Rehoboth
Bay

0
A

Indian River
Boy
MILLSBORO '@D
India River

41,

MILLVILLE

DA SBORO
BETHANY
CEAN BEACH
VIEW

FRANKFORD

say
.1m
FENWICK
ISLAND

RGURE 22
REHOBOTH
INDIAN RIVER

ASSAWOMAN BAY
1969

EXISTING DEVELOPMENT

MARSHLAND

RURAL REHOBOTH
BEACH

Rehoboth
Bay

0
e%

Indian River
Bay
MILLSBORO
Indian River

I VILLE
D@BOR BETHANY
BEACH
CEAN ---
VIEW

FRANKFORD

Saw
say
MILES
FENWICK
ISLAND

POLLUTION, WASTE DISPOSAL AND RELATED PROBLEMS

As w as noted in the introduction to this section, the outdoor recreation experience takes
place in the total environment. Only if each facility were to be located in a closed eco-systern
with its own atmosphere and hydrologic cycle could the broad picture be ignored. Pollution of
the water has already taken a toll of the outdoor recreation potential. The Delaware River north
of Woodland Beach is polluted although swimming still occurs with possible health hazards.
Major portions of the Rehoboth and Indian River bays are closed to shellfishing due to
pollution. Many of the impounded waters in the State are of marginal quality due to pollution
or siltation. Surface discoloration on the Delaware River due to the release of oil from vessels
and the surrounding refineries is a common occurrence. Overflows from combined storm and
sanitary sewerage systems, and from improperly functioning or inadequate systems, result in a
discharge of fecal matter and other offensive solids into streams and rivers. Intrusion of salt
water from the bay into the Delaware River and into domestic water supplies along the shore,
caused by the increased consumption during periods of extended low flow, is becoming more
common. In each case the outdoor recreation experience is significantly reduced, and in the
worst cases the natural resources are no longer available for any use. There are fewer fish and
less wildlife for fishing and hunting. Commercial fishing is further impaired. The tidal marshes
and wetlands produce less nutrients for aquatic life. More and more water is pumped from deep
wells lowering the water table and inviting saline encroachment. Evidence of these effects can be
seen in the following cases.

Water and air pollution can have a very harmful effect on fish and wildlife and their
recreational potential. Water pollution, in particular, is a growing problem since it often
produces a lethal environment for fish and other aquatic life. In some cases the pollutants are
not deadly, but make the seafood unfit from human consumption.

The Delaware Bay, the State's primary water resource areas, is subject to various pollutants
such as industrial chemical wastes, oil from mosquito ditches, waste oil from steamships,
sewage, detergents, insecticides and herbicides.24 The DDT level found in the flesh of white
perch from the Delaware Bay is reported to be the highest recorded in the United States.
Changes in some forms of acquatic life, vis., shellfish, are thought to be a partial result of water
pollution.

The impact of this pollution is critical for man. The chemicals which lodge in these marine
species are transferred to higher forms of life including man. Increasing concentrations in many
may affect the chemical balance of the body eventually affecting digestion, nutrition and
reproduction.

In recent years there has been a large decrease in the number of oysters and blue crabs in the
bay, While much of this decrease is attributable to the -MSX- disease, it is suspected that
pollutants, some of which are known to be fatal when accumulated in small quantities in the
flesh of shellfish, are a contributing factor. Since 1958, when the MSX blight was recorded, the
commercial value of the oysters and blue crabs from the Delaware Bay has declined from over
$2,000,000 per year to about $226,000 per year in 1966, according to the Division of Fish and
Wildlife.

The oyster harvest has also been decreasing in the United States as a whole. During the last
half century there has been a decrease nationwide of roughly 50 percent. This decline has been
attributed to pollution resulting from population growth and accompanying industrial ization.25

24Carl N. Shuster, Jr., A Biological Evaluation of the Delaware River Estuary, Information
Series, Publication No. 3, University of Delaware, Marine Laboratories, 1959, P. 46.
25 Shuster, A Biological Evaluation of the Delaware River Estuary, P. 46.

119

A more serious water pollution problem exists in the upper part of the Delaware River. A
comprehensive study of pollution in the area has been conducted by the Federal Water
Pollution Control Administration, Department of the Interior. The study area used in this case
stretched from Trenton, New Jersey to to Liston Point, Delaware. The study findings revealed a
sharp decline in the fin fish harvest during the first half of this century. From 1885 until 1900
the annual catch by 4,000 fishermen was approximately 25 million pounds, valued at nearly
$4,500,000 at today's prices. Coversely, the annual harvest by 1920 was only 1.5 million
pounds; b 1966 the annual harvest was only about 80,000 pounds, worth approximately
$14,000.2@

The specific reasons for the large decrease in estuarine fish are unknown; however, it is
believed that a major factor is poor water quality resulting from industrial and municipal waste
discharge into the estuary. Other possible factors are improper fisheries management,
introduction of predatory fish species into the upper river, and siltation from river dredging
operations, etc., which covers spawning areas.

The extent of the pollution problem can be illustrated by Figure 23 which depicts the
closures of certain water areas to shellfishing due to pollution.

Air pollution, while having a less severe record, also reduces the quality of the recreational
experience. Until recent years, an industrial activity located near a State park and a resort
community markedly affected the odor level in the vicinity. In the northern portion of the
State a large area of considerable wildlife and scenic value is continuously shrouded by the
discharge of a petrochemical complex and a large electric plant. The increase in numbers of
motor vehicles without smoke control devices has added pollution'to areas located anywhere
near to congested highways. Smoke emmissions from formerly unregulated outdoor burning and
from inefficient home heating units produce a layer of smoke cover over many communities.

All aspects of environmental intrusion are of concern to the Governor of Delaware. He
devoted a major portion of his recent State of the State message to the controls that are to be
implemented over the next five years. One of the first departments to be formed under the
re-organization of State government was the Department of Natural Resources and
Environmental Control, which represents a combined effort of all natural resource agencies
towards achieving a more desirable condition.

Initial efforts have begun to collect the necessary data to formulate overall policy and
programs, and to correct some of the more serious problems. Studies are underway to provide
more complete information on the shellfish problem and its relationship to pollution. Other
studies, including the study of the inland bay estuaries mentioned elsewhere in this report, have
been completed in response to the pollution problem. Within the last year regional sewage
systems have been analyzed and recommendations have been offered for establishing the sewer
districts and implementing construction.

The solution to the pollution problem will not come easily or cheaply. The action program
of this plan indicates the variety of studies currently underway and those proposed. From these
will come the data and from the data will come regulations, acquisition programs, development
policies, and management practices to ensure the protection of Delaware's environmental
resources for all potential uses, while there are still resources to protect.

26 Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, Delaware Estuary Comprehensive Study,
1966, P. 50.

120

FIGURE 23

SHELLFISH CLOSURES, 1968

ELSMERE WILMINGTON DELAWARE BAY, REHOBOTH BAY
rJ, NEWARK @/ I AND INDIAN RIVER BAY
NEW CASTLE

(it 0 MILES 110
-.A

ODESSA
0 (%%

YN4 SHELLFISH CLOSURES
f

SMYRNA

DOVER P3
0 vln

MILFORD

LEWES

REHOBOTH

GEORGETOWN

SEAFORD

0
LAUREL BETHANY BEACH

121

THE RECREATION NEEDS OF URBAN RESIDENTS

As much of the Nation's population continues to be concentrated in increasingly urban areas
the amount of space for outdoor recreation too frequently is lost to the rush for more
dwellings, more roads, more commercial and industrial enterprises, and more public serivces and
facilities. The most urgent recreation needs, those closest to the concentration of residences, are
most poorly accommodated because of past development patterns, the competition for lands
for all uses, the strain on local finances to meet the rapidly growing needs, and the prohibitive
costs of acquiring recreational lands in the heart of the urban setting.

With the continued flight to the suburbs of the middle and upper income, and usually white,
residents the most urban areas become the home of the poor, the aged, and the
social-disadvantaged. Yet these most deprived urban residents are almost entirely dependent
upon public recreation facilities while a wide variety of public and private facilities are readily
available to the more affluent suburbanite. Further, these same groups, because of limitations of
income and education, often need to be informed of both the facilities that are available and the
benefits to be derived from ernjoying these facilities.

Acreage in the terms of number and size of the facilities is not enough. As the National
League of Cities notes in their study or recreation in the nation's cities "the simple fact remains
that in all major cities large numbers of inhabitants do not have access to public recreational
facilities because the parks are not where the people are."27

The problem is not as acute in Delaware as in many other areas due to the character of the
urban portion of the State (i.e., relatively low density) and the presence of on-going park and
recreation programs in Wilmington and the urban areas of New Castle County. Nevertheless, in
1960, 87 percent of the Wilmington-New Castle County portion of Delaware was classified as
urban, with New Castle County being one of the fastest growing counties in the Nation and
showing little signs of a slow-down. Obviously this growth will place greater burdens on existing
recreational areas and on the opportunities to obtain additional areas. While the County parks
program has resulted in 83 areas as of July, 1969, with others being added as funds permit,
considerably more evaluation is necessary to determine the proper role of State facilities and
programs in meeting urban needs, especially in such areas as the facilities to be provided in
urban-serving areas, the development of State-wide rivers and trails systems, and the relationship
between proposed facilities, potential users, and the availability of public transportation.

A number of factors affect the type and quantity of facilities needed in the urban area.
These include the characteristics of the population, the geographic location of the urban area,
the attitudes and interests of the residents, the nature and extent of crime and social unrest, the
degree of citizen involvement, and the structuring of the careful attention in the development of
a plan which properly reflects urban needs. Even if the parks were where the people are, they
would serve little value if they do not reflect the local needs.

A number of recent governmental changes and anticipated changes prevent this Outdoor
Recreation Plan from adequately exploring the urban need. First, the State has just recently
recognized the full range of recreation needs of local governments by the establishment of a
local park development fund to complete the State programs of local recreation assistance.
Since this fund was only created by the 1970 Legislature, considerable work is necessary to
implement it ans to assess its impact. Further, the State has recently reorganized its Natural
Resources agencies into one department which will facilitate a unified State approach rather
than a fragmented approach through a number of independent agencies.

27 National League of Cities, "Recreation in the Nation's Cities - Problems and Approaches,"
December, 1968.

122

This reorganization, which encompasses all State functions, also creates a Department of
Transportation which will have the responsibility for all forms of transportation including both
highways and mass transit. The agency will be better able to evaluate public transportation
needs and relate these to the State's and the local recreation plans.

In addition to these changes a merger of the New Castle County and City of Wilmington
Parks and Recreation agencies has recently been proposed. This merger, if implemented, will
improve the local ability to plan for, acquire, and develop facilities to serve the urban and
suburban need. This consolidation would also improve the ability for the State and local
governments to work together.

With these constraints, this plan will recommend a study of urban recreation needs as part of
the first annual update of the plan. This study will assess the nature of urban needs, determine
the types and magnitude of facilities necessary, develop an urban-oriented action program, and
outline a program for State and local facility acquisition, development and programming to
serve the urban residents. This study should provide the basis for a responsive, innovative
approach to urban recreation needs and a framework for public and private action.

LOSS OF PRIVATE RECREATION LANDS

Private lands that have long been used by the public for hunting and fishing are being
withdrawn from public use at an alarming rate. The impact of the loss of these lands is
compounded by the steady increase in the number of hunters and fishermen.

An estimated 75% of the farmland in New Castle County and northern Kent County is
posted with "No Hunting or Trespassing" signs. In Sussex County and southern Kent County
land is "posted" to a somewhat lesser degree, however, some of these lands are open to hunting
if permission is asked, and respect for the property is guaranteed.

In addition to privately restricted lands, there are extensive lumber company holdings,
especially in Sussex County, that are closed to hunting. Because of the obvious fire hazards
during the hunting season, the "no hunting" regulations are rigidly enforced.

Lands are also being withdrawn from public use because of a relatively new occurrence -- the
leasing of hunting rights. Although the leasing of areas for waterfowl hunting has been going on
for several years, leasing for upland game hunting is in its infancy. Several hunters now form a
group of possibly ten people and buy the exclusive rights to hunt on a farm, usually paying a
specified amount per acre. The fishing rights to some ponds are also sold on a yearly basis.

Other previously public game land is removed from public use every year by development
practices, such as new highways, residential development, and industrial expansion. Town
annexations take hunting land, since hunting is usually banned within town limits, although the
character of the land may be unchanged for years.

The reduction in the supply of private recreation land, open to public use, therefore, is
caused by many factors. Principal reasons are the abuses of hunting privileges by some
destructive and irresponsible outdoorsmen, the expansion of urban land uses, and the
income-producing attraction to many landowners.

Possible solutions to this problem include the more obvious provision of State lands for these
uses to offset those lands lost. Other solutions, however', could involve programs of assistance
(technical or financial) to private landowners for wildlife development with one agreement that
the facilities be available for reasonable public use, and stronger action at both State and Local
levels to implement land development controls which protect the best wildlife habitat.

123

Examples of these controM would be flood plain zoning, conservation zones, and open space
reservations in subdivision regulations. Finally, a public relations program could be used to
encourage private landowners to open their lands to reasonable use, to foster municipal review
of laws which may unnecessarily restrict the recreational use of newly annexed or other
undeveloped land in corporate limits, and to convince owners of large timber areas to allow
public access. Whether these approaches would provide some solution to the loss of private
lands is, at this point, purely speculation, however, the problem will definitely persist if no
solution is attempted, no matter how speculative that approach.

THE HANDICAPPED

Outdoor recreation facilities should be available for all persons. Handicapped persons often
are excluded from participation in outdoor recreation activities by the failure of park planners
and others to include facilities designed for their access. In all, too many cases throughout the
nation parking areas are located too far from the active area, steps instead of ramps negotiate
grade differences, sanitary facilities are not useable, hand rails and safety rails are non-existent
or improperly located, halls and other passageways are too narrow for wheelchairs and persons
on crutches, or other barriers are present which restrict use. The plan must assure that facilities
are designed to overcome the previous record of neglect in both public and private facilities.

Handicapped persons include those of all ages and sexes suffering from some physical or
psychological disability. These disabilities can range from the general infirmities of age to the
severe effects of major diseases such as muscular dystrophy or cerebral palsy. Other disabilities
may affect visual ability or the level of intellectual functioning.
According to a recent publication of the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation,28 the effects of
these disabilities include:

1. Limitation in walking

a. difficulty in walking distances because of muscle weakness due to disease or age;

b. difficulty in walking on non-level and non-smooth surfaces because of 1) reliance upon
braces, crutches, or prosthesis; 2) cardiac, pulmonary or neurological problems which
affect strength, flexibility, and coordination; 3) sensory disability affecting balance; or
4) impairment of joints;

c. inability to walk but ability to propel oneself in a wheelchair on level and certain
graded surfaces;

d. inability to propel a wheelchair because of extensive disability, thus requiring an
attendant.

2. Limitations in seeing and/or hearing

a. difficulty in seeing and/or hearing warnings and safety hazards because of limited
vision or audition due to disability or age;

b. inability to see and/or hear warnings and safety hazards because of extensive
disability.

28 "Outdoor Recreation Planning for the Handicapped," Bureau of Outdoor Recreation,
U.S.D.I., Washington, D.C., April, 1967

124

3. Limitation in the use of hands and arms --

a. difficulty in opening gates or doors, manipulating equipment, etc., because of muscle
and joint weakness, or because of the necessity to manipulate crutches, a cane, or a
wheelchair.

b. inability to open gates or doors, etc., because of extensive disability in the muscles and
joints of the hands and arms.

4. Limitation in understanding information, directions, and warnings --

a. difficulty in reading printed signs because of partial sight or intellectual impairment;

b. inability to read printed signs because of blindness or severe intellectual impairment.

I he importance of special consideration of handicapped needs, from the standpoint of this
project, is that facility design should provide for use by these people. Usually only minor
changes in existing concepts will allow handicapped persons the opportunity to participate in or
at least observe outdoor recreation activities.

The typical designs presented in the Plan has included features to make their use more
universal. An example is the wooden beach access included in the Ocean Access Areas. This
feature, built with gentle gradients and with a rough, non-slip surface, allows the handicapped to
traverse loose sand to the water's edge. Another example is the inclusion of ramps on the boat
launch piers so that ambulatory and wheelchair-ridden persons can get to the side of a boat.
Access rails on the lower pier also aid in the use of these facilities as these could extend out
from the pier over the rail of a boat in the loading area. Other examples include designation of
trails in other parks which are wide, fairly level, hard-surfaced, and include a hand rail. These
allow the handicapped to enjoy some degree of pleasure from nature study and sightseeing.

Another example is the design of facilities at Trap Pond State Park. First, a special access
road is available to allow vehicles transporting handicapped persons to drive up to the picnic
areas rather than park in the normal parking lot. Second, a driveway and paved area allows the
handicapped to enter and use the concession and sanitary building. Third, the parking lot is level
with the surrounding ground and grass areas so that no barrier exists for movement between
these areas. Finally, a newly constructed sidewalk connects the concession-sanitary building and
its access to the beach area. This sidewalk and the surrounding beach are also level so as not to
present barriers. The sidewalk is also wise enough to allow easy passage of both handicapped
and non-handicapped persons.

Trap Pond State Park is widely used for outdoor recreation for the handicapped as both
State agencies and private organizations appreciate its good design, variety of opportunities, and
ease of use.

The Plan strongly recommends that present efforts be extended to make as many of the
parks useable for the handicapped as is practical. Final designs should include specially designed
sanitary facilities, ramps to supplement steps where grades require these, tables and benches
which can be used by persons with restricted mobility, and walks, paths, and piers of sufficient
width to allow passage of wheelchairs.

Beyond the scope of this project but still most important, local levels of government and
program operating levels of the State government should evaluate their programs and resources
with the view of including facilities wherever practical for the use of the handicapped.

It is hoped that this plan and a careful awareness of these special needs will help to meet the
goal established by this project of providing outdoor recreational opportunities for all of
Delaware's residents and visitors.

125

WATERSHED DRAINAGE PROJECTS AND RECREATIONAL POTENTIAL

The Division of Soil and Water Conservation is the primary agency charged with
development and operation of watershed protection, flood control, and soil conservation
programs including creation and maintenance of drainage ways, prevention of sedimentation
and siltation of major water channels, and the application of sound soil and water conservation
practices within the soil conservation districts of the State. In the course of its function,
considerable ditching of minor water courses is necessary as is dredging of the bottoms of a
number of major channels. The impact of dredging, whether public or private, has been
considered in another special analysis of this plan; however, the impact of the ditching program
also needs examination.

Essentially, the ditching program is intended to improve natural drainage and thereby
increase the agricultural value of the lands so drained. In the process of this operation a new
channel is constructed or an old channel is reconstructed which necessitates a relatively large
amount of clearing of brush and trees. Closely related to this action is a general tendency for the
private landowner benefitted by the improved drainage to clear once wet brush and wooded
areas for croplands. The combined impact is an initial marked reduction in woodlands and a loss
of wildlife habitat. While some habitat is later re-established by natural growth in the next
growing season , the process of ditching is destructive, the recovery is slow, and the char6cter of
the re-established habitat is much different from the original habitat.

While the immediate results may not be attractive, the ditching is necessary to the realization
of agricultural or other entensive use of the land and to enable proper flood control practices,
although the need for the additional agricultural land may not be justified. The concern arises
from the manner in which the ditching is done and the unrealized recreation potential these
ditches possess.

in the first instance, available funds have in the past dictated the least costly approach,
which is also the least attractive. The present process involves clearance of land on both sides of
the ditch sufficient for the operation of a drag line, for disposal of the material, and for the
access roadways for equipment movement. In some cases the area cleared is 150-220 feet wide.
(Figures 24 and 25).

Where this clearing is done on State lands the original purpose of those lands may be
seriously violated, for example, the removal of up to one acre of forest cover per each 200-210
feet of channel. The plan strongly recommends that those responsible for funding the ditch
projects earnestly consider the availability of other techniques, at least those which more
efficiently utilize the wood resource such as full "knockdown" of the fallen timber into fire logs
and clean removal of the material to more suitable locations for landfill purposes.

The lands necessary for this channel improvement possess generally unrealized outdoor
recreation potential. In most cases the channel is of a length suitable for hiking or bicycle riding
and in some cases the length is sufficient for horseback use. Since the channels follow natural
drainage areas and not roads, they would allow access to parts of the countryside not otherwise
visible. Further, most drainage areas are low-lying and most of the surroundings are generally
woodland and stream-edge habitat. While much of this is disturbed during ditch construction,
the general character of the area would offer an unusual experience, especially if more refined
ditch methods were utilized.

126

LZL
it
Jill

PL
WIN

q,,RX.*

ZI.

V1
7v
C-1

14
0@1

'in
0

0
Z

rill,
60
z m

8zIl.

z
0 7

-a LU
9k

6RE

ffo@ ,

yfw@7 ok- -
z
7,ycj@
F uv.

..... . . . . . .
ON50-*

11 lit ill I

In larger ditching projects the possibility may also exist for canoe or small boat use of the
watercourse itself. This use could be combined with ditch bank improvements and joint use
facilities could serve both. Development of the ditch could include parking at points of contact
of the ditch and a public road, picnic areas at both the parking area and at interior locations,
facilities for launching a canoe or small boat where possible, designated fishing areas, and
..various markers for nature study or other trails.

One problem affecting the use of the ditch and its access facilities is the nature of the tax
ditch company, its organization, and its authority. While the tax ditch company becomes a legal
subdivision of the State and can exercise a broad range of powers as described in Title 7,
Chapter 41, of annotated Delaware Code, the title to the right-of-way for the ditch remains with
the individual property owner. Further, the tax ditch company, the ditch manager, and other
agents of the company can only enter on the right-of-way for purposes of construction and
maintenance of the ditch. No other purposes are included in the legal rights of the company or
in the court order which creates it.

Recreational uses, therefore, would be possible only upon agreement of each property owner
to allow public access for such uses. Only if the land or the right of public access was acquired
from the property owner would the areas be available for recreation use. While the purchase of
these rights for public use would probably not be unpopular in areas of little agricultural
potential, the acquisition would most likely be opposed when the ditch banks and right-of-ways
traverse croplands.

A detailed evaluation of this potential was not possible at this time; however, it is.
recommended that each ditch project, existing and proposed, be reviewed by the Department of
Natural Resources in regard to recreational use as well as a review of the ecological impact of
the proposal on the wetlands. This review should be automatic whenever State lands are
involved along the ditch and a matter of procedure for all major projects. The analysis should
focus on such factors as public roads, proximity to State or other public lands, nature of the
terrain and cover, location relative to urban concentration and potential for recreational or
other use of both the right-of-way and the watercourse, A conceptual evaluation of the multiple
use potential has been prepared as Figure 26 . This evaluation indicates the process from the
original drainageway through the present reconstruction to a program of recreational
development and wildlife habitat restoration.

The Outdoor Recreation Plan strongly recommends that reconcilation of the need for
drainage improvement, the need for outdoor recreation facilities, and the shortcomings of the
present ditching approach be given a high priority within the new Department of Natural
Resources. The needs are clear. All that is necessary is a more realistic approach to funding and
a more complete evaluation of potentials. An approach such as outlined in Figure 26 would
seem in order with the Department of Natural Resources and Environmenta ,Control working
with the State Planning Office in each instance where State lands are involved.

LAND ASSEMBLY AND PROTECTION

Delaware's natural resource agencies have experienced little difficulty in the past in
assembling the land necessary for their outdoor recreation facilities. This experience appears to
indicate an interested public and responsive governmental programs, most significiant, given the
constraints of the techniques that can be employed for assembly of these areas.

Land assembly for outdoor recreation purposes in Delaware is limited to fee simple
acquisition at the State government level and further limited to negotiated purchases versus
condemnation in most instances. Whether this favorable attitude toward government purchase
will continue cannot be foreseen at this time; however, experience elsewhere and the increasing
value of the highest priority areas suggests that some assembly difficulties could arise in the
future. These could be especially serious in the protection of the most threatened resources.

129

OEL

01W
rai-

0 C14

rol-4

1
1. cI
.

Ci
@ 1.91

A more significant problem -relates to the inability of the State to protect the areas desirable
as open spaces, short of their acquisition. It is obvious that not all of the open space can or
should be part of a State park or other State-owned area. Much of this open space can and
should be left in private ownership and used for passive-type uses which complement State
ownership and which also protect the resources, provide visual buffers, satisfy other open space
functions, and aid the local economy.

The plan recommends that limited land control measures be adopted at the State level to
preserve these open spaces. This recommendation was previously included in the Comprehensive
Development Plan for Delaware.

Specifically, it has been suggested that the State adopt open space zoning at the State level as
well as legislation authorizing purchase of open space easements and development rights. The
implementation of open space zoning at the State level would provide a broad framework
within which local zoning and land development could occur. The use of the approach would
provide an additional guarantee that desirable open space areas would be protected and
preserved in a manner consistent with State and local plans and policies. These approaches
would allow for preservation of uelaware's agricultural, wildlife, and stream valley areas in
accordance with the open spaces proposed in the Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan. The
ability to obtain less than fee simple interests would allow for the right of public access to these
areas and also the inclusion of peripheral areas which do not meet the strict requirements of the
conservation zone and which would not be feasible for fee simple ownership. In these cases, the
State could acquire limited interests to preserve the area's character without the necessity of
taking title.

County and municipal zoning and subdivision regulations would be free to control
development within this broad classification. It should be noted, however, that the problem of
land assembly and protection is compounded by another problem, that being the administrative
and financial constraints on the local governments. The latter special problem was discussed in
the preceding section.

The availability of additional land assembly and protection devices, given the special
problems affecting the local governments, would allow greater flexibility at the State level,
provide for establishment of an open space system, and insure proper use of the agricultural and
conservation areas while permitting urban development in accordance with local plans and
needs.

LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

One very significant characteristic of the past and present outdoor recreation activity is its
dominance by the State government. Only one county, New Castle, has an active parks and
recreation program with the other two having considerably less developed interest. Kent County
has recently established a parks and recreation committee and is moving toward the hiring of
some professional staff, while Sussex County has to this date expressed little interest in the
topic. In both of the latter cases, active participation in meeting the outdoor recreation need is
not foreseeable in the near future.

The problem of responsibility is augmented by the lack of effective zoning and subdivision
regulations in the lower two counties. These deficiencies complicate the creation and protection
of a viable open space system as well as frustrate the fulfillment of highly local needs.

As a result, the State must assume considerable development and maintenance costs for
recreation facilities, the need of whose users may be beyond the State's responsibilities.

131

It is highly desirable for counties to assume responsibility in the acquisition, development
and maintenance of outdoor recreation programs which will serve local needs. Local planning
and development, as opposed to state development, is more apt to consider and satisfy the
preferences and needs of local people. The cost of operations and maintenance by local agencies
would be substantially less for those areas which do not require the services of a full-time
resident manager.

Fiscal and administrative constraints handicap all three counties and most municipalities at
the present time and these constraints will persist for the immediate future as problems of sewer
and water service and development control are tackled. The State has made efforts in the past to
assist the localities in acquisition, and it is recommended that these efforts be continued.
Additionally, funds are now available for development at the local level, and the various State
natural resource agencies should actively participate as consultants to local governments in
meeting their needs. As these governments become more capable of operating local recreation
facilities, the State should consider transferring facilities which are local in character to local
governments. In this way, State funds and personnel could be utilized on facilities which have
regional, State-wide, or metropolitan significance.

132

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I DELAWARE
OUTDOOR RECREATION
I PLAN
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
133
I

134

POLICIES FOR OUTDOOR RECREATION

As part of the program for the Outdoor Recreation Plan for Delaware, policy development
meetings were held with State, county and local officials; State legislators; and other individuals.
The purpose of these meetings was to allow an interchange of ideas and positions regarding the
State's role in meeting outdoor recreation needs, the type of facilities required and their
locations, the relative emphasis to be placed on meeting the needs, and other matters related to
outdoor recreation planning, programming, and administration.

Based on these meetings and on further discussions and comments of the participants, the
following policies emerged. Two levels of policy are presented as certain proposals seemed of
broad-scale significance while others were more specific in nature.

BROAD POLICIES

1. The State's Outdoor Recreation System will be characterized by resource protection,
thereby providing for nature-oriented experiences and activities.

This policy relates to the State's role in providing for outdoor recreation facilities. It
specifies that the State shall concentrate on facilities which have regional significance and which
are primarily for the purpose of protection and efficient use of natural resources. It also implies
that the most urban-type facilities should be the responsibility of lower levels of government,
although where feasible some of these local-sponsored projects might share land with the state
facility. This does not imply, however, that the State's facilities will be less "active" than local
facilities, only that the uses in the State area will occur in a natural emphasis. Further, the types
of active uses may be different in the State facility as compared with the local facility.

2. The State will continue to expand its technical assistance to counties and municipalities
for acquisition and development of local open space facilities. This role should include
financing, planning, and development assistance with the State acting as professional consultant.

This policy and the first are directly related. The State recognizes the inability of the
counties and the municipalities to fully meet their responsibility due to financial and
administrative constraints. Therefore, the State adopts as a policy the creation and
administration of funds, programs, and staffs to act as consultants to these jurisdictions in
meeting their programs.

3. In order to maximize the effectiveness of limited financial and physical resources, action
will be directed primarily at acquisition of those areas deemed important in the overall system
rather than development of land in public ownership.

4. Acquisition of land and exercise of other controls over the inland bays and rivers, the
State's wetlands, and areas necessary to complete "urban-serving parks" will be a first priority
over all other acquisition and development actions.

Policies 3 and 4 recognize that action is necessary now to protect the State's remaining
wetlands and waters from pollution, improper development, and the destruction of their
ecology. The policies also recognize the limitations on the State's financial resources and the
necessity of directing these to the areas of greatest need. Consequently, acquisition projects,
especially where wetlands, water areas, or lands necessary to the proper development of an
urban-serving facility are involved, will have first priority in the distribution of funds, followed
by other acquisitions, and then by development. The best legacy this program can leave the next
generation is the opportunity to develop the land this program preserves in open space. The plan
recognizes, however, that initial development is necessary to serve present needs, especially that
of persons residing in the urban portions of the State.

135

5. A Department of Natural Resources has been created to include all agencies, boards,
commissions, and departments whose duties involve protection, development, use, or
administration of natural resources. This department should be encouraged to develop in-house
capability for program planning relatcl to the funding, acquisition, and development of the
State's natural resources in a manner consistent with proper Statewise Comprehensive Planning.

This policy recognizes the need for coordinated action by all agencies involved in open space
planning, provision of outdoor recreation facilities, management and protection of fish and
wildlife and their habitats, preservation of natural resources, and prevention of damages to these
resources. It supports the merger of these agencies into a single department whose new structure
could develop in-house management and program development capabilities for all merged units.
This Department would be in a better position to work with the State Planning Office in
establishing total State government priorities, in coordinating open space and recreation needs
with comprehensive planning, and in submitting requests through the State Planning Office for
funds and programs it must administer due to the need for an over-all comprehensive approach.

6. Development of outdoor recreation and open space systems and complexes shall be
encouraged over the acquisition of small, scattered, and unrelated parcels. Particular emphasis
shall be given to "filling-in" voids in present large State ownerships in order to make them more
complete, useable units.

Scattered, small ownerships conflict with the purpose of natural resource protection and
effective use as they usually are not sufficient to prevent incompatible land use activities on the
adjacent areas. They are difficult to manage and increase the paperwork of inventory keeping.
Furthermore, expansion of these areas, especially to accommodate a change or increase in the
degree of use, is often difficult due to surrounding development. Development of larger
complexes and open space systems will allow space for efficient use, will insure more complete
resource protection, and will aid in the development of open space separators in and around
urban concentrations.

7. The federal government shall be encouraged to continue their present primary role in
Delaware, i.e., essentially concerned with navigation and with fish and wildlife management, and
encouraged to coordinate recreational facilities with the State's program.

The federal governments's responsibility covers needs which exceed local and State
jurisdictional boundaries. Included are the protection of migratory waterfowl, the protection of
the ecology of the estuaries, and the maintenance of routes of interstate marine transportation.
These areas are legitimate concerns of the federal government, however, recreational uses which
can be generated as additional uses of these areas should be closely coordinated with the State's
efforts in order to encourage multiple-use programming and avoid duplication and inefficiency.

SPECIFIC POLICIES

The following policies deal with a specific aspect of the open space and outdoor recreational
system or its administration.

1. The State shall give priority to projects which serve the recreational needs of urban
residents.

2. Because of the valuable ecological contribution of marsh wetlands, the State will continue
its emphasis on preservation of these areas in their natural condition and limit the use of
these areas in a manner consistent with proper fish and wildlife management.

136

3. Promotional activities directed toward the State's outdoor recreational facilities should
emphasize those areas which are presently under-utilized and the new facilities to be
provided, rather than the shore. In this way the economy of the entire State would
benefit from diversified recreational experience while avoiding an overburden on the
beach areas.

4. Master plans of all present and proposed outdoor recreation facilities will be developed as
one of the highest priorities of the outdoor recreation planning program. Development of
any area should be dependent upon this plan and should not be funded prior to the
completion and approval of the master plans.

5. Recreational and other development of areas administered by the Division of Fish and
Wildlife, Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control shall be
compatible with the welfare of the fish and wildlife resources in order to protect the
status of species' populations, minimize the consumptive enjoyment of game species, and
preserve the non-consumptive values of all species for aesthetic and scientific purposes.
6. Multiple use potentials of all State and other public ownerships shall be fully explored,
including use of school facilities and the spaces surrounding public buildings for outdoor
recreational programs.

7. The State will continue its policy and program of acquisition of mill ponds and other
water bodies and should acquire sufficient land at each to accommodate the recreational
faci I ities as needed.

8. The lease-concession type arrangement will be fully utilized for commercial services
provided on state lands whenever private enterprise operating under State supervision
would result in a reduction in direct costs to the State at the same level of service to the
public (including maintenance, part-time employees' salaries, and other administrative
costs) or bring about a general upgrading of the service provided.

This arrangement is also desirable on lands which have high recreational and ecological
values but which also have value for commercial uses where unrestricted development of
the commercial value by a number of enterprises would be detrimental to the other
values. Furthermore, this arrangement could be used to encourage a particular
commercial activity through State control and ownership of the necessary land.

9. Regulations shall be adopted and enforced which allow strong State control over
dredging, filling, and bulkheading of wetlands and tidal shorelines, and control over or the
requirement of approval of impoundment projects and the artificial ponds or lakes so
created.

10. The State will actively encourage the provision of camping facilities by private enterprise
operating under adequate regulations and at a reasonable return. In this regard, the State
should avoid under-cutting private operation by less than fair market rates and limit
camping development to lands which are capable of supporting it pursuant to
comprehensive master plans.

137

11. The present State outdoor recreation lands and facilities will remain under State control
and operation even if these do not conform to proposed ownership policies until another
unit of government indicates a willingness and ability to use them for their needs or until
disposition of these properties would not handicap satisfaction of the needs expressed in
the State's outdoor recreation program. If local or county governments indicate this
interest, the development and operation aspects of the present or proposed uses, if
compatible to overall comprehensive plans, will be transferred to the locality, subject to a
deed restriction requiring perpetual outdoor recreation use of the parcel by the local
jurisdiction or reversion of the property to the State. The interested local unit in each
case should satisfy the State of its ability to provide the service.

12. Local governments shall be encouraged to develop recreational areas specifically suited to
the needs of their residents. This policy recommends that the facilities in local parks be
evaluated in terms of social, economic and physical characteristics of the proposed area to
be served.

13. Preparation of open space and recreation plans as part of local comprehensive plans shall
be encouraged to serve as the guide fo r local acquisition and development projects and for
distribution of State and federal grants.

14. Private enterprise shall be encouraged to satisfy a substantial portion of the outdoor
recreation need, especially in those activities which are appropriately suited to
commercial endeavors such as campgrounds, horseback riding stables, golf courses, and
marinas. The private facilities will be expected to meet the highest standards of
environmental protection and public service.

138

THE DELAWARE COMPREHENSIVE OUTDOOR RECREATION PLAN

The plan is dedicated to the achievement of a system of State Parks, Forests, Fishing Areas,
and Wildlife Areas to serve the present and future residents of the State, encourage the growth
of its economy and provide a reasonable balance between recreation land and land for homes,
industry and commerce. In response to this challenge, present State recreation lands have been
evaluated to have been the plans of the natural resource agencies in regard to natural features,
projected development and certain criteria deemed appropriate for delineating outdoor
recreation areas. The natural features of the State have been evaluated in the preceding section;
hence, the other two considerations are briefly examined here prior to outlining the proposed
State outdoor recreation facilities.

PROJECTED DEVELOPMENT

The Comprehensive Development Plan for Delaware outlines community development areas
which represent the major growth areas in the State. While the State outdoor recreation areas
need not be as carefully related to future populations as are those at most local levels of
government, the State must consider the needs of urban area residents, especially as they relate
to specialized facilities available only at State areas.

Figures 27 and 28 depict the 1964 development, the revised 1980 population projection
from the Comprehensive Plan, and a forecast of the year 2000 distribution of population based
on continuation of the 1960 to 1967 growth rates. As can be seen from this analysis, the
majority of the State's population will live in the most urban portion of the State, the
Wilmington Metropolitan Area. Secondary concentrations center around Dover, Seaford-Laurel,
and Milford with somewhat less intense concentrations at Millsboro-Selbyville, Rehoboth Beach,
and Smyrna. Since many of the facilities will provide activities which are user-oriented and since
the distribution of population will affect the type and location of State facilities, these
projections have been built into the State facilities program.

CRITERIA FOR STATE ACTION

In delineating areas for State acquisition, certain criteria must be established which guide the
direction of future acquisition and the type of area to be acquired. The goals, objectives and
policies of the plan provide the overall framework for the following criteria:

1. The area should have significant natural, historic or prehistoric value and should be suited
by size and configuration for a State facility. Recommended minimum sizes are 500 acres
for a State Park and Forest and 1,000 acres for a wildlife area.

2. The area should be bounded by natural boundaries (river, bay, woods or identifiable
geological feature) or by significant man-made boundaries such as a major road, railroad,
or utility easement.

3. The area should be delineated in a manner which will allow control over access and use
where necessary.

4. The proposed acquisition should satisfy the intentions of the goals, objectives and policies
of this plan, especially protection of valuable natural resources, as well as help meet the
projected outdoor recreation need.

5. Contiguous ownerships resulting in a managerially and developmentally efficient unit
shall be stressed. However, due consideration must be given to the existence of prime
agricultural, industrial, and residential areas.

6. The proposed acquisitions should give emphasis to urban needs for activities of the type
common to native-oriented facilities and should reflect the present and projected growth
of the State.

139

FIGURE 27

1964
GENERALIZED
URBAN
DEVELOPMENT

- - --------
- -------------

140

FIGURE 28
COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT
AREAS

KAU I* A"m

ism

1-980 POPULATION 715,000
-1,000,000
2000 POPULATION

VONA

AULWA

141

THE STATE'S PROGRAM

The Delaware Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan includes a variety of facilities ranging
from the active park to the most passive forest preservation or wildlife area. The plan designates
the following facilities: Wildlife Area; Impounded Waters, Water Accesses, and Related
Facilities; Forest Preservations and Woodlands; State Parks; and Historic and Prehistoric Areas.
An analysis of the areas proposed for each of these categories and the activities they provide is
included in the sections that follow.

Also included in this section are evaluations of present outdoor recreation ownerships,
considerations of areas in which the State should express a long-range conservation interest, and
evaluations of the State's role in meeting local needs.

Based on the State's natural features, the distribution of present and future population, the
findings of the preceding sections and the established criteria, it is recommended that the State
acquire a total of 34,950 acres by 1980 and 22,600 acres between 1980 and 2000.

These acquisitions, combined with present ownerships, would provide over 61,000 acres of
outdoor recreation land by 1980 and 83,800 acres by the end of the planning period. These
lands would provide for seven major parks, nine wildlife areas, two large forest preservations, a
number of preserved historic and archaeological sites, and well over fifty public fresh water
fishing ponds.

The areas, their recommended ultimate size, and their BOR classification are shown in Table
34. The -locations of the major areas are indicated in Figure 29 Individual descriptions follow.

WI ILDLI FE AREAS

Wildlife areas represent prime natural resource lands which are valuable foe wildlife
management purposes. These areas encompass much of the most productive wildlife habitat in
the State and offer sport, education, and pleasure as well as serving as a vital link in the cycle of
many life forms. Potential uses include hunting for a wide variety of game, picnicking, hiking,
horseback riding, field trails, fishing, and nature study.

Wildlife areas are of two major types, upland and wetland. Each has its own characteristic
terrain, and each offers certain opportunities not readily available in any other type of facility.
Fortunately, the need for preserving many of these areas has been long recognized. In no other
type of outdoor recreational facility is the State so well blessed with a legacy of past action. At
the present time, there are over 15,800 acres of wildlife area administered by the State Game
and Fish Commission, 5,000 licensed to the State by the U.S. Corps of Engineers and another
22,000 acres under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Department of the Interior.

Past actions,' however, have not fully met the need and are not likely to be ample in the
future based on the findings of the needs study. This study indicates a need for 75,434 acres of
land for hunting in 1980 and over 97,000 acres of land for hunting by the year 2000. Even
when these needs are tempered by an assumption that all hunting should not take place on
public land, it is still obvious that additional land is necessary for this one sport, without
consideration of other outdoor recreation uses these areas accommodate. While much hunting
and other wildlife area uses will occur on private lands, continued urbanization will deprive
many of their contacts with individual land owners as well as deprive the urbanite of available
space for these pursuits.

142

TABLE 34

Proposed State Outdoor Recreation Areas

Outdoor Recreation Area BOR Present Add. Ultimate
by Type Class. Acres* Acres Acres

Wildlife Areas:
Augustine - Silver Run 111 753 11,247 12,000
Blackiston 111 1,417 3,583 5,000
Woodland Beach 111 3,543 2,057 5,600
Little Creek 111 3,217 4,083 7,300
Milford Neck 111 1,371 6,129 7,500
Petersburg - Willow Grove 111 3,320 3,180 6,500
Inland Bay 111 0 2,000 2,000
Assawoman Bay 111 1,3291 1,271 2,600
Nanticoke 111 925 7,075 8,000

Sub Total 159875 40,625 56,500

Ponds, Lakes 9 Water Accesses:
Ponds & Lakes (Land Water) 11 1,047 3,371 4,418
Marine Access 11 77 63 140
Stream Valleys 111 0 1,900 1,900

Sub Total 1,124 5,334 6,458

Parks:
White Clay Creek 1 127 503 630
Brandywine Creek 1 434 566 1,000
Lums Pond 1 1,075 675 1,750
Fort Delaware VI 305 0 305
Killens Pond 11 620 2 500 1,120
Cape Henlopen 1 1,641 2,000 3,641
Delaware Seashores 1 1,890 710 2,600
Trap Pond 11 965 1,555 2,520

Sub Total 7,057 6,509 13,566

Forest Preservations:
Blackbird 111 676 124 800
Redden 111 1,520 980 2,500

Sub Total 2,196 1,104 3,300

Estuary Protection - Inland Bays 111 0 3,976 3,976

Total State Facilities 26,252 57,548 83,800

As reported by the Natural Resources agencies as of July 1, 1969

130.4a. included in Del Seashore State Park now part of Assawoman
Wildlife Area.
2 Includes 59.0a. of water at Coursey Pond now under the Division of
Fish and Wildlife.

143

BRA CREEK
WHf CLAY CRE K FIGURE 29
PROPOSED
STATE FACILITIES

f RT 0 AWARE
L MS P No

AU USTINE STATE PARKS

WILDLIFE AREAS

FOREST PRESERVATIONS
9I.ACK8 90 FOREST ACCESS ARM
A
ACKISTON

WOODLAND EACIi

iftlLE

P D

MILFORD NECK

CAPE HENIOPEN
RUDEN FOREST

DELSEAS14011ES
NANTICOKE INLAND SAY

TRAP POND

ASSA OMAN BAY

144

The Outdoor Recreation Plan for Delaware proposes, therefore, that acquisition of both
upland and wetland areas continue. Such acquisition, however, should be for the purpose of
completing existing wildlife areas in order that they may be efficient management and
recreational units.

Delaware's wetlands are among the most productive on the Atlantic Coast and are part of a
coastal marsh system which annually provides nesting, rearing, feeding, resting and protective
cover to a significant number of the 4 million plus waterfowl using these areas during their
north and south migrations. These areas also provide habitat for numerous other birds, for
furbearers, and for many small game species.

Equally important, these wetlands and the estuary they serve have significant value as the
nursery areas for all forms of marine life. These wetlands in essence are the key to the
.maintenancp of fish resources of the Delaware River and Bay as well as in the Atlantic Ocean
(See Figure 30).

These areas are also among the most threatened as they are valuable for industry and
commerce due to their proximity to navigable waters. Likewise, they are also valuable, after
destructive filling and canal or channel construction for waterfront residential development.
These two actions are presently taking in excess of 1,000 acres a year.

In order to protect as much of this resource as is practical for conservation reasons (i.e., the
relationship of marsh and fisheries) and for recreational uses the plan recommends acquisition
of 26,700 acres during the next thirty years. Of this total, 11,200 acres should be acquired in
New Castle County, 12,300 acres in Kent County to fill in present areas, and 3,200 acres in
Sussex County to help protect the ecology of the inland bays. These 3,200 acres will form part
of the 8,000 acres deemed essential to the Sussex bay estuaries as determined by the
"Environmental Study of the Rehoboth, Indian River and Assawoman Bays," report to the
Governor, prepared by the State Planning Office, in November, 1969.

Upland areas offer a somewhat different type of outdoor recreational experience than those
offered in wetlands, although many similar activities can take place. For example, both areas
offer hunting, nature study, and hiking, yet the experience differs in the first due to different
species and habitat and in the latter cases due to considerably different terrain and cover.

The upland propotsals include additions to present wildlife areas and are intended to add
additional grassy fields, woods and woodland edges to the present inventory. Because of their
character, these areas also have value as forest preservations. These areas are located in the
central and western portions of the State in a manner which offsets the bay orientation of the
wetland areas and with the wetlands provides a well balanced wildlife opportunity for all
residents of the State.

The plan proposes additions to existing areas during the thirty year period to an eventual
total of 1"3,700 acres in these areas. The distribution of the ultimate system includes 6,700 acres
in Kent County and 7,000 acres in Sussex County. No upland acquisition are recommended in
New Castle County as urban day-use needs and land values make action to accommodate other
outdoor recreation experiences more critical. Upland needs of New Castle County residents will,
however, be served by the Canal lands licensed by the U.S. Corps of Engineers to the Game and
Fish Commission and -the ultimate 5,000 acres of upland preservation in the Blackiston area
which is within an hour's drive of the most urban portions of the State.

145

FIGURE 30

General Schematic Diagram of Life Cycle
Habits of Some of Important Salt Water Fish Species
in Delaware

FRESH WATER

Salt Line

Spawning Area*

1 st Year

2nd Year

3rd Year

OCEAN

Species such as winter flounder, striped bass, croaker and sea trout spawn in areas of
about 3 to 4 parts per thoLfsand salinity. This condition is found in the portion of the
Delaware Estuary from the Chesapeake and Delaware Canal south to Little Creek. The
fingerlings spend the first and often the second year of life in brackish waters. During the
third year they will cycle into the salt environment and return to spawn at a fresh water
interface. Of the 18 most important salt water fish species in Delaware, over 80 percent
are endemic to the Delaware Estuary environment and all spend some part of their life in
that environment.

Source: "Delaware Fisheries and the Estuarine Environment," Ronald W. Smith and
Dr. Kent Price, University of Delaware, Newark, Delaware, October, 1969.

146

These wildlife areas have two major purposes, the first being the protection of wildlife
species and the ecology of the wetlands through the preservation of appropriate habitat and
through proper species management. The second purpose is to provide areas for public access to
recreational activities including hunting, nature study and interpretive facilities, picnicking
areas, information services, trail systems for walking or riding, and in some cases fishing
accesses. Additionally, some portions of the areas will be utilized for safety and service zones
and for observation towers, managers' residences, and wildlife management, experimentation,
and research. Land requirements for these activities are expected to include: ten acres for
service needs; 5 acres for information, checking, and management buildings; 20-30 acres for
safety zones, and an additional 5-10 acres for picnicking, trail-related activities, and parking.
These needs would total approximately 50 acres at each wildlife area with the remainder of the
area used for hunting, paths for hiking, and trails for horseback riding. The latter two uses have
been included with hunting lands as these uses do not greatly overlap in season of activity, and
any conflicts could be easily resolved by area management.

In terms of meeting outdoor recreation needs, these areas under State ownership and the
lands noted earlier will provide an instant capacity for 3,600 hunters in 1980 and capacity for
5,600 hunters by the year 2000. Additionally, the areas will provide for a recommended two
additional nature study areas per decade for a total of nine areas by 2000, a similar number of
hiking and riding trail systerns, and approximately 500 picnic tables to accommodate 2,200
users at one time.

A conceptual development plan, Figure 3 1, has been prepared for the typical wildlife area as
an indication of the possible interrelationships of wildlife and recreational uses which could be
realized at each wildlife area in response to local needs.

It is important to note the distribution of these areas in relation to the projected urban
development of the State. As was noted earlier, achievement of hunting areas is largely
precluded within the Wilmington Metropolitan Area due to the scarcity of undeveloped land
and its high value for more active recreational and other uses. Nevertheless, by 1980
approximately 33,000 acres of State and federal wildlife lands will be located within one hour's
drive of the projected 477,000 persons in this urban area in this period. Almost 45,000 acres
will be located within 1 to 1-1/2 hours drive of these same urban residents, with much of this
acreage also serving the urban residents of Dover (62,200 persons in the Dover Development
area in 1980) as well as residents of the Middletown-Odessa, Smyrna-Clayton, and Milford areas
which are projected to have a combined 1980 population of 62,850 persons.

Additionally, some 18,000 acres of upland and wetland areas will be located in the southern
portion of the State (south of Dover) to provide the opportunity for these experiences for the
projected 200,000 residents in this area by 2000. Also, these lands will provide an auxiliary
experience to the estimated 100,000 persons who enjoy Delaware's ocean and bay beaches on
certain peak days during the summer.

At no point would the proposed acquisition involve a trip of over 2 1/2 hours from any
resident, or for that matter, any visitor from the metropolitan area who wished to enjoy the
benefits of these natural areas and the wildlife they protect.

147

FIGURE 31
MULTI-USE POTENTIAL
TYPICAL WILDLIFE AREA

AlOA00
COMPLEX

HIKING rRAIL
WlkoLlrt sruOY ARIA

TO WER TRAIL

NISrORIC
51 rfs
FERRY PONJO
COMPLEX
WILDLIFE 5 rUOY AREA-,-,,,

YovrH
.0 FUTURE
ALA YFIELPS
t CA vc,

SERVICE
AREA

PARKING
'p,clvfc
PA RKINO IHIKINC, rRAI4.
I.A4(NCN
PICNIC TOWER
I WILDLIFE AREA
y
...... .......

...........
BOA r #I
-A CC
CANOI 1S5

PICNIC
.............. FLI TOWER.. fPARKIA(&,l LAIV.MCH
..'WILD Lirs PARKING
STVPY AREA 'LiA.,.,
PICNIC

POND
C ONALEX

WILDLIFE AR44

e-HORSE TRAIL

NOT TO SCALE
148

IMPOUNDED WATERS'WATER ACCESS AND RELATED FACILITIES

A specific policy of this plan indicates the State's dedication to the acquisition of
impounded waters and sites as well as the provision of facilities to ensure the right of public
access to tidal waters. A long-range program of the State Fish and Wildlife Division has been the
acquisition of pond and lake sites, the construction of control structures, and the provision of
launching ramps, parking areas, and related facilities to encourage use of these waters for fishing
and boating.

To date, some 21 lakes and ponds have been acquired, providing 13 fresh water launches and
related recreational uses. The plan recommended continuation of this program to eventually
include public ownership of all significant impounded waters.

The needs study indicates that additional water and land areas, boat launch facilities and
parking will be necessary to satisfy the 1980 and year 2000 demand. These needs include 65
boa, launches for fishing and a capacity for 6,525 boat fishermen and 19,565 shore fishermen
on a peak day (2000 demand) as well as some 176 launching sites for other boating uses.

In order to partially satisfy this need, existing ponds and former pond sites were reviewed.
This analysis indicates that 40 sites, ranging in size from 8 acres to 350 acres of water, have
merit for State action. (Figure 32). If all of these sites were acquired, a total of 2,800 acres of
fresh water would be made available for this activity. Further, these areas would provide space
for 55-60 boat launches for fishing and canoeing.

If the present standard of land in amount equal to 10 percent of the water area (with a
minimum of five acres of access) is followed, the total land adjacent to these water areas would
equal 330 acres. In each case, the land acquired should be sufficient to provide one acre of
parking for each boat launch, a minimum of 15 picnic tables (2 acres of the 5 acres minimum)
and related parking, and sufficient pond frontage for fishing, landscaping, passive play uses, and
parking for non-boat fishermen. The area acquired at these sites, however, should be more
inclusive than at previous launching areas in that efforts should be directed toward preservation
of some shoreline to a depth of at least 200 feet from the water line. This additional area would
allow land for picnic sites, bank fishing areas, the boat launch, parking, areas for seating, and
sanitary facilities which would make the facility more- attractive and useful. Figure 33 suggests
this type of development. Formation of the Department of Natural Resources and
Environmental Control and improvements in acquisition funding would facilitate an appropriate
distribution of functional duties in the development and administration of these areas.

While these pond sites and their development will satisfy a major portion of the total State
need, they unfortunately will not satisfy much of the urban need since all but ten sites are
located in the southern two counties, and these ten sites are outside the highly urbanized
portion of New Castle County. These ten sites will, however, provide approximately 820 acres
of public fresh water fishing and boating within a 30 minute drive of the urban areas. Therefore,
the plan recommends a first priority for acquisition of these areas and at least 80 acres of land
for accesses.

One proposed impoundment deserves additional emphasis, that being the 350 acre lake to be
created as part of the Upper Choptank River Watershed Project being conducted by the State
and federal soil conservation agencies. This project, located in western Kent County, would
create a substantial waterbody for public use, The lake would be the major water area in central
and southern Delaware.

149

FIG[ E 32

POTENTIAL PUB-- FISHING PONDS

0 L----------- - -
00 0 MILES 10

0 0
0
0 0 POTENTIAL PUBLIC P ONDS

-J 0 0 PRESENT PUBLIC PONDS
I---------- (STATE & LOCAL)
0 IN,\ N,
0

o 0

tic
opo

0
0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0

0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0

150

FIGURE 33
TYPICAL POND COMPLEX

5ANIURY PICNIC
SWIMMING AREA F4calrr AREAS

PICNIC AREAS PARKING
SAIVIrARY BANK
,cAcILlry FISHIN6,
FAcalry

PARKING
POND

BOArLAUNC# SANK
awl, IC15HINCV
goo mcalry

PARKING

5ANIIARY BOAr
PARKM6 SANK rAcalry rRAILER
JOISMINS -PARKING
S/ res PICNIC AREAS
,PICNIC AREAS

SA NI r4R Y AA C

NOT TO SCALE
A @RKIM

151

Development of this area as a park was not desirable due to the high cost of the necessary
land and facilities of such development, the location of the * facility in relation to the State's
present and projected population, and the proximity of other outdoor recreation areas presently
suited for the same type of uses possible on the non-water portions of this area. The recreational
value of the pond, however, requires some action to allow public use. Since the proposed
impoundment abuts a former Highway Department borrow pit, the plan recommends use of the
pit, with appropriate reclamation, for accesses, parking, picnic areas, and informal play. Also at
this site the plan recommends construction of the type of facilities suggested in the "pond
complex" typical. This type of development and the non-water opportunities possible at
Petersburg Wildlife Area just six miles away would, in essence, provide a "park" at much less
cost, especially for land, with greater resource utilization than would be possible under any
other approach. This approach would cost approximately $500,000.

This development would also provide a good opportunity for demonstration of the multiple
use value of the watershed project and the reuse potential of a borrow pit. It would also provide
an opportunity for joint development between the Fish and Wildlife Division (pond and control
structure) and the Parks, Recreation and Forestry Division (recreation facilities).

The right of public access to tidal waters is rapidly being lost through development or other
restriction on the individual's ability to cross the private lands surrounding such waterways. If
present development patterns continue, especially in the inland bays, this right may be limited
to a very few present public launching areas. In recognition of this development, the Fish and
Wildlife Division has provided for 17 salt water accesses throughout the State (see Inventory
Section). Additionally, two State parks provide boat launches for salt water activities in the
inland bays. While sufficient data is not available to determine the exact needs by number and
location for additional access, it is recognized that salt water access is desirable and that present
facilities are inadequate for the demand. Therefore, the plan recommends provision of at least
two additional access points to the west side of the Rehoboth Bay, one additional access on
Indian River Bay near Massey's Landing, at least one additional access on the west side of the
Nanticoke River, one additional access area near the Chesapeake and Delaware Canal to better
serve the urban area, and one access area in the vicinity of the Little Creek Wildlife area to
better serve the greater Dover area. Figure 34 depicts a typical marine access area, designed to
provide such access and to allow for other uses in much the same manner as suggested for the
pond sites.

One additional consideration involves canoeing and similar activities. Few other outdoor
recreation activities provide a closer link with nature and heritage than canoeing. Canoeing
allows access to many shallow interior watercourses and provides a view of the watercourse and
its natural surroundings not easily obtained in another fashion. In a similar manner, most areas
suited for canoeing can be used by any non-motorized shallow draft vessel. Access by these
means can provide rewarding experiences including fishing and nature study, especially
photographic study, as well as the canoeing or boating experience.

The planning program was not able to thoroughly explore and delineate watercourses
suitahle for these uses although one 4-1/2 mile system was explored and several other systems
seem possible. It is recommended that a special recreation study be undertaken as part of the
continuing planning program to evaluate these areas and explore means for their protection and
availability for public use.

The major problems confronting these systems are the rapid development of adjacent land,
the continued problem of pollution, and the lack of tools other than acquisition in fee of the
shoreline for the system's protection. As a first step toward the development of the system, the
plan recommends designation of the upper Murderkill River and Brown's Branch from Coursey's
Pond to McCauley's Pond as a canoe and fishing water area. It is further recommended that this
system be zoned as open space under the Kent County Zoning Ordinance and that land areas
suitable for bank fishing and for canoe or small boat accesses be acquired and developed by the
State Fish and Wildlife Division.

152

FIGURE 34
TYPICAL MARINE
ACCESS AREA

ElvrRANCE
ROAD

RL.A1Vr1,VC-

Pl, A Y A R-rA

P/C /C
)v I N.,
..! -.. -,0
A REA 0
0
0
X
X 00 0 *0

@ o'
04 1
0 0
0 5AIVI UR Y 8.4,06
0
0
r 000000000000
'poooo 000 oo T
'3
000,0000000 0
CAR RARIONG 21k 0
0
0
0
0 0 CAR i,#OA7
0 0
0 0
00 0 R INro
0 FPO,
0 0
0000000000000e
0
0
0 0000
00
SWI MPAING DOV.04E RAMP
RAER

NOT TO SCALE

153

Major features of the Murderkill system include a connection of the proposed
Killens-Coursey Pond State Park and the McCauley's Pond Fishing area, the virtual lack of any
urban intrusion into the system, the potential for good public fishing and canoeing access, the
opportunity to re-use a State-owned borrow pit for recreation purposes, and the system's
proximity to a 1980 projected 120,000 persons within a 1/2 hour driving time. The value of this
link and its experiences should serve as a model for additional systems elsewhere in the State.

The recommended scheduling for the provision of impounded waters, accesses and
protection of the streams is:

A. Acquisition of at least two ponds or pond sites per year until 1980 and one site
thereafter, with initial preference given to acquisitions to serve urban residents:

B. Development of fresh water launches and related recreational and service uses, including
necessary dams, bottom clearing, and parking at the above rate with emphasis on such
development at presently owned sites first, urban acquisition second, and new
acquisitions third;

C. Acquisition and development of at least one marine access area during each five year
period beginning with 1970-1975; and

D. Evaluation of potential canoe and small boat systems and delineation thereof with
appropriate legislation and acquisitions to provide at least one major system in each
County by 1980 and others thereafter. As a preliminary suggestion these could include
the Brandywine and the Red Clay Creek in New Castle, the Murderkill in Kent, and the
James Branch in southwestern Sussex County as part of the Trap Pond State Park.

FOREST PRESERVATIONS AND OTHER WOODLANDS

Woodlands are as important a part of the total ecology of the State as any other natural
resource areas. They provide cover and habitat for many forms of wildlife; they are part of the
process by which the oxygen content of the atmosphere is maintained; and they contribute to
the total rainfall-runoff-absorbtion cycle. Woodlands also provide screening, add value to
adjacent developments, and contribute to the psychological satisfaction with one's environment.

These woodlands are increasingly threatened by urban development. During the period
1962-1965, woodlands disappeared at the rate of 305 acres per year along the two mile wide
Delaware Route 2 (Kirkwood Highway) urban corridor and the total acres of woodland in this
same corridor decreased by 1,900 acres from 4,500 acres in 1954 to less than 2,600 acres by
1965.29. Historically, the woodlands in the State have decreased from about one million acres
at the time of the colonial settlements to about 391,000 acres in 1959.'30

At the present time, some 6,246 acres of woodland are under State Forest ownership with
other woodlands being included in the properties of other State and federal natural resource
agencies. These ownerships, totalling approximately 9,000 acres, represent about 2.3 percent of
the 391,000 acres of forest in the State.

29 "Trees-Woods-Urbanization and You," Agricultural Experiment Station, Circular Number 3,
University of Delaware, Newark, Delaware, December 1966, P. 8.
30 Interstate Water Resources Survey, State of Delaware, 1959, from the section on the State
Forestry Department, P. 27-2.

154

The State Forester has identified 115 different species of trees native to Delaware wood-
lands.31 Although not every tree species can be found throughout the State, it is important
that these individual species be afforded the same concern given to the rare and endangered
wildlife species in order that no part of the State's natural heritage be lost.

The Outdoor Recreation Plan for Delaware recognizes the value of these woodlands not only
their natural value but also for outdoor recreational activities. These areas provide an
opportunity for nature study, hiking, picnicking, horseback riding, and organized youth group
camping, as well as the background for more active pursuits. Therefore, woodlands, especially
the forest edge, have been utilized in the delineation of many of the proposed acquisitions. Two
areas have been officially designated forest preservations and acquisitions totalling 1,124 acres
are recommended to increase the size of these areas to a total of 3,320 acres. The areas are
portions of the Blackbird State Forest, located southwest of Middletown, and the Redden State
Forest, located in the center of Sussex County. These two areas are specifically reserved as
forest tracts and are intended for minimal development. As both forests have activity areas in
them, the plan recommends focusing all future development at these locations to provide a
heart-of-the forest experience. A maximum of 5 percent of these tracts should be intensively
developed with the remainder left in a natural state interrupted only by necessary fire roads and
trails. In terms of relationship to the projected need, these areas have been included in the
hunting calculations in the wildlife area section. In regard to other uses, they could each provide
for a youth group camping area, could each accommodate horseback riding trails, a series of
hiking and interpretive trails, primitive camping, at least one nature study building, and
approximately 35 acres of picnicking sites scattered throughout the areas for a total of 250
tables accommodating an instant capacity of 1,125 users.

Other major forest or woodland areas are included in the proposed wildlife areas, in many of
the parks, and in the areas noted for long-range conservation interest.

One area of specific woodland preservation corresponds with the Murderkill Stream Valley
System which was delineated strictly in regard to forest cover and which emcompasses
approximately 1,500 acres of woodland. Furthermore, over 14,000 acres of forest cover are
included in three major wildlife areas (Nanticoke, Petersburg-Willow Grove, and Blackiston) as
well as scattered tracts within the other wildlife areas.

Woodland is also preserved in the proposed State Parks. Portions of the proposed
Brandywine Creek and White Clay Creek Parks are wooded as is a large portion of
Killens-Coursey State Park. Likewise, the recommended acquisitions along James Branch and in
the vicinity of Trussem Pond, are intended to preserve an area noted for the natural beauty of
the Cypress tree, a species which is now rather limited in Delaware.

In addition to these holdings, private commercial enterprises control well over 20,000 acres
of prime woodland. If these areas are properly managed for logging, their woodland value would
be presumed. The only constraint on the use of these lands for permanent open spaces or for
recreation is their private ownership status. Reasonable regulation coupled with cooperation and
incentives from the governmental bodies would be of considerable value in assuring public
enjoyment of these woodlands. Smaller private ownerships are also valuable for recreation use,
especially for hunting and nature study. Forest management information and education
programs, relevent assessment practices, and a revision of drainage and other construction
programs help to protect much of these remaining forest resources.

Finally, woodland is also preserved in large measure in the long-range conservation areas
which include the Cypress Swamp, areas along the inland bays, much of the present Ellenclale
and Redden Forest holdings, the estuary of the St. Jones River, and areas along the Brandywine.
These woodland conservencies combined with those above will preserve approximately 25,000 -
27,000 acres of prime woodland for public use and enjoyment while protecting almost 7
percent of the total woodlands in the State.

31 Delaware Trees, William S. Taber, State Forestry Department, 1936.
155

STATE PARKS

Parks are the most completely developed of all State outdoor recreational facilities and are
the most extensively used. For these reasons and their location which must reflect accessability
from the urban concentrations of people, these facilities are also the most expensive. Therefore,
the number, location, and development must be given the highest level of thought and proper
planning. In order to approach the level of concern necessary, the plan includes a review of the
potentials for park use of other areas as demand warrants. This analysis includes evaluation of
natural features, population location, the availability of funds relative to the cost of the facility,
and the objective of reaching an overall minimum level of development in every park by 1980 to
ensure public use of each of these facilities.

It should be noted that these reviews do not preclude the need for master planning as these
reflect only a cursory evaluation of the area resources and their potential for outdoor
recreational uses. Such reviews are useful, however, as points of discussion of costs, activities,
and priorities and as a general indication of the degree to which the outdoor recreation need will
be met.

White Clay Creek State Park

White Clay Creek State Park is located in the northwestern portion of New Castle County,
about three miles north of Newark, and about 18 miles west of Wilmington. It is proposed to be
approximately 700 acres in size, and located adjacent to a proposed 1,400 acre water supply
reservoir. Because of its proximity to large concentrations of population, the park development
emphasis is on day-use facilities.

The area encompassed generally includes that property lying east of Route 896, north of the
proposed alignment of the Newark circumferential highway, west of the White Clay Creek
reservoir, and south of the Del aware-Pen nsylvan ia boundary. The proposed park includes two
relatively small peninsulas north of the main portion of the park, included because of their
isolation, and the fact that they will be cut-off from the rest of the State by the reservoir. If
available at a reasonable price, these peninsulas could offer opportunities for primitive camping,
fishing, and picnicking accessible only by boat. If not available, the 630 acres in the main
portion would provide an excellent outdoor recreational potential.

The terrain, although very steep in some areas and heavily wooded in others, offers many
opportunities for the development of a variety of activities. Among these are: swimming,
boating, picnicking, golf, informal athletics, and court and deck games. Supporting facilities,
such as a lodge for informal group activities and an outdoor theater for the performing arts,
could also be provided. The golf course is a much needed recreational facility, there being a
shortage of such facilities open to the general public in this area. A regulation 18-hole, par 73
golf course if recommended.

The reservoir forms the focal point for the water-oriented activities. Because of possible
reservoir water level fluctuation, if swimming is to be provided, it may be necessary to provide
for a stable water level area by constructing a dike across the mouth of a small cove west of the
proposed dam site. It is recommended, however, that prior to constructing the dike, a study be
conducted to determine possible pollution problems which may arise because of the limited size
of the cove and whether they can be economically solved. In the event that the pollution cannot
be controlled, then consideration should be given to the construction of a swimming pool
adjacent to this cove.

Boating will be permitted on other portions of the lake. Both a boat launching ramp for boat
owners and a rental concession for day-users are recommended.

156

Picnicking, one of the most popular of outdoor recreation activities, and generally enjoyed in
conjunction with other activities, is generously provided for with sites for family and group
picnicking areas serving 3,435 people recommended. The family picnic sites are in the more
wooded, steeper areas oriented to the lake while the group areas are in the flatter, more open
areas.

As mentioned, an ideal opportunity for primitive camping is afforded by the two relatively
small peninsulas in the northern sector of the park. Space is available for about 20 sites,
accessible only by boat. Reforestration will be necessary to make the area useable.

White Clay Creek State Park, at full development as proposed herein will provide an instant
capacity of approximately 13,000 to 14,000 people.

Activities Instant Capacity

Picnicking 3,435
Swimming 4,000
Boating, Fishing, and Related Activities 4,700
Golf 200
Active Recreations 600
Other Uses 100

Total 13,035

This park is highly oriented to the proposed reservoir. If, for some reason the reservoir is not
built, it is recommended that the park boundary extend to the centerline of White Clay Creek
to preserve the steep slopes and to allow public access to the stream. In this case, the beach
complex should be replaced with a pool complex; the picnic areas expanded to the degree
possible on the slopes; and White Clay Creek Road closed for use as a nature trail.

Development of this park should be given a high priority due to its proximity to the
Delaware urban corridor from Newark to Wilmington.

Brandywine Creek State Park

Situated astride Brandywine Creek in the rolling topography of the Piedmont Plateau,
Brandywine Creek State Park provides outdoor recreation opportunity for the most urban
portion of the State. The park is located within five miles of Wilmington, easily accessible to the
majority of the area's residents. The park is characterized by rolling topography and open field
to the west of the Brandywine and rugged wooded slopes to the east. These characteristics offer
outstanding potential for development of a varied nature-oriented facility.

The State presently owns 433 acres on the west side of the Brandywine and this plan
recommends expansion of the facility to approximately 1,000 acres by an arrangement with
Woodlawn Trustees for the public use of some 500 acres of steep slopes and woodland on the
east. The proposed park boundary would generally follow Delaware Route 100, Thompson
Bridge Road, Mount Lebanon Road (Maintenance Route 363) and the east edge of the large
Wooded area between Thompson Bridge Road, Concord Pike, and Route 363.

Because of its location relative to Wilmington, development emphasis is on day-use activities
and interpretation and enjoyment of the park's natural qualities. The plan recommends the
following development for this park.

157

There is an extreme shortage of public swimming facilities in this area of the State. Except
for Brandywine Creek, there are no natural water bodies which could be used to create adequate
facilities, and extensive beach development along this creek would mar its attractiveness and
detract from the proposed fishing and boating. Consquently, a pool complex is recommended to
contain separate swimming, diving, and wading pools, a bathhouse and snack-bar building, play
areas, and a parking area. This facility would be lighted for night-time use. Its size and proposed
prominent location on the site make it advisable that care be given to provision of an attractive
setting for the structures and of adequate tree and plant or landform screening for the parking
area.

With its existing nature study building, this park affords an excellent opportunity to fill a
great need for conservation education. An expanded nature study interpretive program centered
around the building and existing trails will also serve to preserve the naturalness of the more
wooded areas of the park. A tower, accessible from the trails, is recommended for wildlife
observation. I

Picnicking is recommended for this park, although the sparseness of trees in the designated
area dictates that it be developed to ultimate capacity over a period of time. The sites initially
developed should be in the existing woodlands. Simultaneously with this initial development,
the remaining areas should be planted: one area with landscape size trees (two inch caliper or
larger) for use in approximately ten years; another area with seedlings, for use twenty year
hence.

Utilizing Brandywine Creek to greatest advantage, pleasure boating and fishing are proposed.
It is suggested that a canoe and rowboat concession be established, and that boating be limited
to the southern portion of the Creek. Boat and bank fishing will be permitted in the area to the
north,

The Woodlawn Trustee's lands, considered a part of this park, present a unique opportunity
for compatible use of public and privately-owned lands. It being the Trustee's desire that these
lands be preserved in their natural state, it is proposed that only nature trails and small, trailside
picnic areas be provided. A single footbridge could provide access into the area; more than this
would make the area too accessible and tend to overcrowd the area.

Brandywine Creek State Park, at full development as proposed herein will accommodate
approximately 7,400 people on a peak day. The instant capacities by activity provided by full
development are:

Activity Instant Capacity

Picnicking 1,800
Swimming 2,000
Boating, Fishing, and Related 250
Active Recreations 1,500
Hiking and Nature Activities 1,750
Other Uses 100

Total 7,400

158

Development of this park has been given a high priority as its location and potential outdoor
recreation opportunities would serve much of the need of Delaware's most urban residents. In
this regard, it is further recommended that the Division of Parks, Recreation, and Forestry, in
conjunction with local groups, provide programs to-enable the urban residents, especially the
lower income and minority groups, to reach the park and make use of its facilities. Specifically,
this could include shuttle bus service for a "day-in-the-park" and various educational programs
at the park which are not reflected in the instant capacity.

Lums Pond State Park

Lums Pond State Park has come into State ownership through the United States Army Corps
of Engineers' activity along the Chesapeake and Delaware Canal. It was originally bought to
provide a water supply for the canal locks. When the canal became a sea level waterway the
pond was regarded as excess land and turned over to the General Services Administration for
disposal before any damage through filling took place. One hundred and sixteen acres of the
State-owned portions are currently developed as a State park. The 464 acre State park land is
contiguous to a 563 acre wildlife area and 5,000 acres of federal land along the Chesapeake and
Delaware Canal and could be part of a linear park system along the Canal including recreation
areas at Lums Pond, at Fort DuPont in Delaware City and at selected spots on the Canal. The
area has a great potential and can become a strong link in the State's recreation program, for it
serves the State's major metropolitan area.

The park possesses considerable potential for a wide variety of outdoor recreation uses
including camping, swimming, active play, hiking, nature study, picnicking, boating and fishing.

The plan recommends acquisition of lands enclosed by Routes 301 and 71, and Road 54 to
form a park containing approximately 1,750 acres. The park is focused on the 209 acres of
Lums Pond in recognition of the aesthetic value and recreational potential of large water bodies.
A master plan has been prepared for the development of this park and its development has a
high priority due to its urban-serving character.

Two basic concepts have been adopted for this park: (1) the pond is a significant waterbody
whose full recreational potential should be utilized through such means as bottom
improvement, sediment control, water management and development of the fish resources; and
(2) the efficiency of providing the facilities shall be obtained by proper location for joint use,
by congregation of facilities requiring utility services, and by careful location of facilities in
regards to soil and forest factors.

The park provides for a golf course, active recreational areas, and camping along with related
facilities to serve the needs of park users. Water oriented uses, both at the pond and at pools,
and a historic area (containing two important structures, the Sign of the Buck Tavern and the
Samuel Davies House, both under restoration by the State Archivist) are suggested throughout
the park. Fishing and picnicking accesses are suggested throughout the park, however, limited to
foot and boat access in the more passive portions of the park.

The northern and western portions of the park and the north shore of Lums Pond are
suggested for active recreational use while the south-western portion is suggested for family and
group camping. The park has sufficient tree cover to allow for development of camping areas,
open fields for both passive and active recreation near both campers and day users of the park,
and an area now used for a beach. The area also has a long wooded shore on Lums Pond highly
suited for fishing access, picnicking and hiking.

Finally, portions of the pond and adjacent woods and fields are recommended for natural
environment areas. These and other passive use areas at the western end of the pond would
provide a valuable nature orientation and contrast to the more active facilities.

159

The park, as outlined, could accommodate an instant capacity of approximately 17,505
persons and a daily use capacity of 38,912 persons.

Activity Instant Capacity

Picnicking 4,830
Swimming 4,800
Boating, Fishing, and Related 1,202
Golf 250
Camping (Family) 2,418
Camping (Groups) 100
Active Recreational Areas 1,480
Hiking and Nature Activities 550
Other Uses 1,875

Total 17,505

The estimated cost of this type of development is $22,790,000, including all recommended
facilities. These costs envision utility service to the active recreation area and water and
dumping stations to each group or cluster of camping sites. This level of development would
provide a viable outdoor recreation experience consistent with funding constraints as well as
allow for future adjustments to meet the needs of the urban portion of the State which it serves.
As necessary, the facilities provided could be augmented by facilities along the Canal and tied
into an overall system for recreational utilization of the Canal lands.

Fort Delaware State Park

Fort Delaware, a former prisoner of war facility and Civil War fort, is located on a 305 acre
island in the Delaware River. The fort, a five sided structure, is significant example of masonry
craftsmanship of the Civil War era and includes a wide moat and large calibre gun emplacements.
The fort has been vandalized during earlier periods, but recent interest by historical groups has
resulted in restoration of a portion of the original quarters, improvement of the interior
grounds, and operation of a museum. Park improvements have included clearing of the parade
grounds and access paths, construction of dock and ferry slip, and provision of picnic facilities.

The island, known as Pea Patch Island due to a local legend which cliams that the island was
formed from a ship loaded with peas which ran aground at this point, contains some 135 acres
of marsh and approximately 170 acres of fast land, most of which is heavily vegetated.
Development of the island is constrained by poor water quality, mosquitos, and significant but
vulnerable waterfowl habitat on portions of the marshes.

Because of these constraints this plan recommends very limited development of the grounds
surrounding the fort except for some open meadow play areas on fill in the southwestern
portion. Extensive restoration of the fort is not recommended, however, restoration of the
parade grounds, major interior frame structures, and informational facilities would be
appropriate.

It is recommended that the picnicking on the island be expanded to accommodate
approximately 300 persons at a time (up from 180 now) or a total of 70 tables. This use would
occupy about 10 acres. The remainder of the park should be left in its natural state,except for
nature trails and historic markers.

160

The breakdown of capacity by activity is:

Activity Instant Capacity

Picnicking 300
Nature Trails 100
Tourists 100

Total 500

A feasibility study is being prepared for the restoration of this fort to determine the amount of
expenditure necessary to put it into usable condition.

Killens Pond State Park

Killens Pond State Park is located in central Kent County within easy reach of the major
development expected in central Delaware. It is within a half hour drive of the Dover and
Milford urban areas which are projected to have combined a 1980 population of 105,800 and a
2000 population of 148,000.

The park focuses on two fresh water ponds, Killens and Courseys with a combined water
area of approximately 110 acres, and the stream-valley of the upper Murderkill River. At the
present time, there is very little development on the park, however, initial planning indicates
that substantial development is possible with-in the limitations of funding,

Primary facilities recommended include a beach complex on Killens Pond, boating
concessions on both ponds, picnic areas, a nature study complex and areas reserved for active
recreational uses such as ballfields, tennis courts, and basketball courts. The park could also
include a day camp area designed for organized group activities.

The recommended facilities would make use of the park's most significant resources: the two
ponds, the surrounding woodlands, and the dry and level open fields.

Access to the water is a major problem at the present time as major portions of both ponds
cannot be easily reached by vehicle or from any boat access point. In order to overcome this
problem, the park should provide for boat rentals on both ponds plus public launching access at
Courseys Pond where such an area currently is available.

The park concept recognizes the value of the wooded pond setting for passive recreation,
especially picnicking and hiking. This setting also provides an opportunity for nature study in an
area rich in variety of flora and fauna.

Additionally, the park area includes large land fields highly valuable for active recreation uses
such as ballfields, tennis and basketball courts, and play equipment. These fields are also useful
for accommodating the roads and parking areas, allowing the woodlands to be preserved for
passive uses. The development of swimming pools and related facilities may be necessary at
some point in the program as the water-contact value of the ponds is increasingly questionable.
In the long-range period, the park. could also include additional camping, active play and
picnicking facilities as well as facilities for other outdoor recreation activities.

Minor realignment of some roads, construction of a new access to Lake Forest School, and
closure of a portion of other roads would greatly improve the setting within the park with little
effect on circulation.

161

The facilities recommended in this evaluation would provide for approximately 17,500
persons:

Activity Instant Capacity

Picnicking 7,755
Swimming 2,000
Boating, Fishing, and Related 1,000
Camping (Day and Group) 570
Golf 220
Other Uses 5,955

Total 17,500

The estimated cost of this development is $20,500,360. This cost includes construction of
the necessary access areas, extension of the beach areas, and active use facilities. The action
program indicates the portion of this development that is programmed for the first ten years.

Development in this park, while important for full recreational use, should be given a
relatively low priority as the three urban parks (White Clay, Brandywine, and Lums) and the
Cape H enl open- Delaware Seashores system experience larger demand and service a greater
portion of the population.

Delaware Seashore State Park

Delaware Seashore is comprised of two parts: the first, a six-mile stretch of barrier beach
extending from Cotton Patch Hills on the south to Indian Beach on the north; the second, a
three-mile section bounded by Fenwick Island on the south and South Beihany on the north.
Many visitors from Maryland and the District of Columbia as well as Delaware residents enjoy
the available recreational facilities at the ocean and bay.

In Delaware a Seashore Park proposed development is primarily focused on ocean and bay
bathing centered on a series of self-contained bathing units, each with a capacity of about 1,000
people, expandable to 2,000. The units will include parking, bathhouse, snack-bar and ocean or
bay bathing. Of primary concern in the development of the ocean front bathing units is
protection of the dunes and their vegetative cover. These dunes form an ocean barrier, and the
protection and stimulation of natural plant growth is the only practical means to preserve and
stabilize them. Consequently, the ocean bathing units should be located with great care and the
access across the dunes strictly limited.

Extensive bayside development is proposed in the Indian River Inlet area and on Burton
Island. Fishing and boating activities will be concentrated here. A fishing pier, charter boat
concession areas, marina and boat launch facility, restaurant and recreation area are proposed. A
focal 'point of development is a recommended activity center on Burton Island which will
provide facilities for public meetings or other social events. Attendance experience will
determine the ultimate development of this facility. It is suggested that a modest amount of
permanent seating and parking be provided initially with grassed over-flow areas provided for
park use.

It should be noted that camping is recommended for the Inlet area, however, this camping
development should only be permitted where there is no risk of damage to the bay wetlands,
such as would occur with filling and bulkheading of these areas for camping uses.

162

Activities provided for at Delaware Seashores:

Activity Instant Capacity

Swimming 30,000
Picnicking 3,000
Boating, Fishing, and Related 3,000
Camping (Family) 2,000
Activity Center 2,500
Other Uses 500

Total 41,000

The capacities provided at Delaware Seashores will, of course, vary depending on the number
of parking spaces and access areas provided. Each access area would provide for 1,000 people
initially with expansion possible for accommodating another 1,000. At least twenty of these
areas would be necessary as a minimum to provide a total capacity of 30,000 persons by 1980.
This is considerably below the 66,000 instant capacity needed for 1980, although much of that
demand will be accommodated in Rehoboth and other resort communities and at Cape
Henlopen. It must be recognized that an attempt to accommodate all or any unsatisfied portion
of the total demand, could result in a degradation of the ocean beaches to the point where their
natural attractiveness and value would be lost. It is necessary, therefore, that a decision be made
regarding the proportion of the ocean swimming demand that will be accommodated on
Delaware Seashores and at Cape Henlopen.

Cape Henlopen State Park

Cape Henlopen State Park is a former military reservation acquired from the federal
government in 1964 when it was declared excess land and no longer needed for defense. The
area presently in the park is part of a larger reservation of which some 800 acres are still actively
used for military purposes.

The Cape Henlopen area is recommended to be extensively developed with several distinct
but interrelated areas of interest. A major focus will be on family camping located on the sand
hill, in the former military garrison area.

Another major area will be the recommended ocean and bay bathing complexes located at
five differnet positions on the ocean side of the park. A third activity of interest will be the
proposed nature study complexes, one at the most northerly tip of the Cape, the other in sandy
and marshy areas in the central portions of the park.

In addition to these proposed water-oriented activities, camping and nature study activities,
facilities for fishing, field sports, tennis, and indoor recreation are recommended to round out
the development of this park.

An area where more study is needed is the potential use of the former submarine observation
towers which dot both Cape Henlopen and Delaware Seashores. At the very least these should
be retained as stark reminders of the characteristics of pre-missile warfare. Appropriate signs
could explain their use to the curious and the military historian. Reuse potentials could include
construction of observation platforms on top of the towers to afford an unparalleled view of the
entire Delaware coast. The tower at the tip of the park would seem particularly usable as it is
topped by a structure formerly used for a weather station.

163

It is recommended that the area south of the present southern military boundary be
designated "Wilderness Beach" with access only by foot or by beach buggy from the most
southern ocean access area. This approach would reduce costs and would preserve some of the
wild, unexplored character of this entire area. The plan further recommends that continued
action be initiated through Delaware's congressional delegation to determine the actual extent
of the property needed for military purposes on the Cape, if any, and to obtain for recreational
use whatever part of the present military lands not needed for defense purposes.

Cape Henlopen State Park, at full development as proposed herein, will accommodate
approximately 23,500 persons on a peak day, as follows:

Activity Instant Capacity

Swimming 12,000
Picnicking 6,000
Camping (Family) 800
Camping (Youth) 200
Boating, FishiM, and Related 2,000
Active Recreational Areas 1,000
Hiking and Nature Activities 500
Other Uses 1,000

Total 23,500

Trap Pond State Park

Trap Pond State Park is located in the southern portion of the State, in Sussex County. It is
the most remote of the State parks from the large population centers of Dover, Wilmington, and
Newark, but it is easily reached via U.S. Route 13, a major north-south artery less than five
miles west of the park. The park size, including proposed acquisitions and protective easements,
is approximately 3,400 acres. Of this total, it is recommended that the present State ownership
be expanded to 1,570 acres including Trap Pond and its immediate surroundings. The remaining
area, 1,830 acres, is recommended for protective easements along James Branch and the former
location of Hitch Pond. These areas are notable for their scenic and botanical value and are
worthy of protection from improper development. If easements can not be obtained, fee simple
acquisition is recommended. Fee simple title is also recommended if a future reconstruction of
Hitch Pond is desired, provided this action would not destroy known stands of cypress in the
present low lands.

Presently the most heavily developed of the parks in the State's system, Trap Pond
emphasizes group use and extended-stay use, characterized by the provision of facilities for the
handicapped and camping areas. In keeping with the site characteristics and the known demand
for extended-stay facilities, recommended development includes facilities for camping,
swimming, boating, picnicking, nature study, and hiking and bridle trails.

A major portion of the area around Trap Pond itself is recommended for campstie
development. Two types of camping are recommended; family and youth camping. Supporting
facilities such as a camper's beach, supply store and recreation buildings are also recommended.

A day use area centered around the existing beach and swimming area is recommended. It
appears that the beach area is adequate for present and projected needs, however, because of the
limited size of the swimming area, it is recommended that investigations be made of the water
conditions to determine steps necessary for enlargement.

164

Some expansion of the picnic facilities is recommended as these are presently heavily used.
In conjunction with this expansion, additional parking would also be required.

The relative flatness of the park, its wooded character and its expanse offer excellent
opportunities for nature study, hiking paths, and riding trails. It is recommended that
appropriate trails be designated and provided with interpretive signs and identification to allow
for self-guided use. Private enterprise could be encouraged to provide an equestrian center
adjacent to the park with provisions for regulated use of the trails for horseback riding.

A unique attraction at this park is the presence of the most northerly known stand of
cypress tress in the United States. A portion of this stand is located in Trussurn Pond, which
should be maintained to serve as a focal point for an interpretive nature study program. Another
portion of the stand is in the marshy remains of Hitch Pond. If it is determined that this stand is
worth saving, then a possible reconstruction of Hitch Pond should be undertaken only if it is
determined that it will not damage these trees.

Boating and fishing, always popular, are also proposed for this park as part of the day-use
complex and on Trussum Pond.

Trap Pond State Park at full development will accommodate an instant capacity of
approximately 10,225 people. This capacity is based on a low intensity of camping except in
the youth camping areas. The density recommended for the family camping areas is
approximately one unit per acre, with a number of units clustered together but separated from a
similar cluster by a significant green space.

The breakdown of capacity by activity is as follows:

Activity Instant Capacity

Youth Camping 200
Family Camping. 1,200
Picnicking 2,000
Swimming 3,200
Boating, Fishing, and Related 725
Active Recreation Areas 1,600
Hiking and Nature Activities 300
Other Uses 1,000

Total 10,225

165

Development priority for this park is rather low as other areas are in closer proximity to
urban areas and are subjected to heavier user demands. However, some improvements should be
made as capital funds'allow, especially to the camping areas and the beach. This park presently
provides a variety of outdoor 'recreational opportunities in a quite satisfying manner; selective
improvement will allow it to continue providing these opportunities.

Holts Landing State Park

The Division of Parks, Recreation, and Forestry presently administers 33 acres located on
the Indian River Bay at Holts Landing. This area at the present time is improved by a boat
launching facility, picnic tables, a small picnic pavilion, and a parking lot. The site once was a
depleted State Highway borrow-pit which was recliamed for recreational uses.

Activities provided in this area are as follows:

Activity Instant Capacity

Swimming 650
Boating, Fishing, and Related 180
Picnicking 560
Play Area - Recreation Area 50
Camping (Family) 400
Other Uses 100

Total 1,940

It should be noted that land in this area is recommended for acquisition as part of the State's
program for protection of the inland bays and expansion of related recreational activities.

HISTORIC AND PREHISTORIC RESOURCES

The Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan recognizes that resources other than those of a
natural origin also are part of the recreation heritage and should be included in any
comprehensive approach to providing a balanced recreational experience. While specific
projections of the role of the historic and prehistoric resources in the total demand can not
easily be derived, it is noted that two of the major outdoor recreational activities, weekend and
vacation trips, traditionally include visits to these facilities by those who recognize the value of
these resources.

As noted in the inventory section, the State of Delaware maintains one major archaeological
site, the Island Field Site near Bowers, and 14 historic 'sites or buildings include the State
Museum Complex. Evaluation of these resources by the appropriate agencies, Public Archives or
Archaeological Board, indicates that many other sites are of significance. The State Archivist
indicated that some 12 other structures were of major significance and should be part of the
State's historic preservation program. The State Archaeologist has indicated a total of 528 sites
of prehistoric value, a number of which are of considerable value and worthy of protection.

166

Neither the Public Archives Commission nor the Archaeological Board has provided outdoor
recreation facilities at its sites, however, provision of such facilities by these agencies or on
adjacent lands by another State agency would seem appropriate. In the case of prehistoric
resources, certain controls are essential to prevent damage to, or removal of, the artifacts by
persons not properly trained and authorized to inspect the sites. The important face, however, is
that many of the prehistoric sites are in, or adjacent to, areas proposed for park or other
outdoor recreation uses. Therefore, the existence of the resource should be closely coordinated
with the area's development with proper facilities provided for public use and interpretation.

In regard to historic sites, some of these are also in areas designated -for outdoor recreation
use. These sites and structures would offer another experience to those available in the outdoor
recreation facility. The Allee House, owned and operated by the State on part of the federal
Bombay Hook Refuge, is an example of this joint use relationship.

Coordination of outdoor recreation efforts and those related to preservation of the historic
and prehistoric resources can increase the opportunities available to the user of both facilities, as
well as add to the significance of the location of the historic or prehistoric resources and also
can protect these resources from the intrusion of adjacent undesirable land uses.

A Statewide Historic Preservation Plan, currently being prepared by the State Archives and
Cultural Affairs Division of the Department of State, in addressing the designation and use of
the State's historic resources. This plan will also discuss and make recommendations regarding
recreational relationships. This plan will also provide for further expansion of the Registered
National Historic Landmarks Program in Delaware. As noted in the Inventory Section, Delaware
currently has six registered sites, however, many more buildings or sites have potential for
listing. This effort will be in accordance with the objectives of the National Landmarks Program
o establish a register of significant historic and cultural properties in Delaware and to develop a
program for grants-in-aid to preserve these properties.
t

A Statewide plan for protection of the State's prehistoric heritage and possible creation of a
Delaware Register of Natural Landmarks would be a valuable complement to the Historic
Preservation Plan and is strongly recommended.

LONG-RANGE CONSERVATION

Some lands in the State are worthy of notation for their conservation value alone, regardless
of any role they may ultimately play in meeting outdoor recreation needs. In some cases, these
lands are critical for conservation or open space purposes, but their size, configuration, or
location does not permit recreational use except of the most passive type. Many of the
remaining wetlands on the State's inland bays are of this type. These areas are often small,
scattered, and lack access; however, they contribute to the complex ecological relationships of
the recreational resources, and hence are worthy of protection.

In another case, the areas could be of such a unique character as to require total preservation-
in their own right with little concession to the demands of recreational users. In this case, the
importance of the area for preservation as a rare part of the natural or historic heritage far
supercedes the recreation need. Yet, the area may provide for passive recreation in the form of
nature study, bird watching, and unstructured hiking.

Still other areas are subjects for the State's long-range concern as recreational resources, but
because of the interest of another jurisdiction or a private conservation group, the area has not
been included in the State's acquisition program. The intention, in so noting these areas, is to
indicate the desirability of State action to preserve the resource should other interests fail.

167

The Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan recognizes:

1. The Brandywine Creek Stream Valley from Delaware 141 north to the Pennsylvania, I ine,
an area now partially controlled by Woodlawn Trustees and of significant recreational and
open space value to the State, New Castle County, and the City of Wilmington.

2. The stream valley of the St. Jones River from the Delaware Bay to Silver Lake in Dover
because of its relationship to the Capital Complex, the significance of historic buildings
on its banks, and its recreational potential for a major Kent County Park.

3. The Cypress Swamp, a 7,300 acre rare wilderness of cypress, the remnants of a once
flourishing forest covering most of Sussex County and now limited on the peninsula to
this major stand.

4. The remaining wetlands of the Rehoboth, Indian River, and Assawoman Bays which are
essential to the preservation of the ecology of these resources and the key to their
continued recreational use.

5. The major pine forests near Ellendale and Redden which now are available for hunting
and various passive uses and which have long-range recreational value. The State's interest
in these areas should be limited to filling-in certain of the voids to achieve more complete
systems for the eventual use of population concentrations in lower Delaware.
6. Areas of unique natural or historic character worthy of preservation in their own right.

These conservation areas have outdoor recreational value and could at some point be made
available for certain recreational uses. The present State interest in the first three cases is limited
to support of the interests and plans of other levels of government and private conservation
groups. The State's interest in the latter cases is purely conservation, especially in regard to
many portions of the wetlands on the inland bays.

The areas within these long-range interests include approximately 20,000 acres, lands
preserved for their value in meeting recreation needs at a variety of levels, for completion of
important open spaces, or for preservation of a unique link with the natural heritage.

RE-ASSESSMENT OF PRESENT OWNERSHIPS

As noted in the inventory section, the State has substantial recreational acreage in over- 100
major ownerships throughout the State. In many cases, these ownerships are characterized by
their lack of continuity with similar parcels, by small size or poor configuration, by a lackof
relationship to a reasonable boundary, or by difficult access or control. Particularly noteworthy
are some of the lands administered as State Forests and as wildlife areas.

One of the broad polices of this plan is to encourage development of outdoor recreation and
open space systems and complexes with special emphasis on filling-in voids in present large
ownerships. Consistent with this approach is the re-examination of each present ownership to
determine if certain parcels could be better utilized or used for trade, lease, or sale to
supplement the recommended acquisition program. This approach is also implied in specific
policy Number 11 which provides for transfer of a parcel to a lower jurisdiction in order to
achieve its outdoor recreation program.

168

In Ilis regard, and will Ile constraints of Ile State's policy, each present ownership was
evaluated in regard to its future contribution to the State's outdoor recreation system. This
evaluation indicated that some 2,800 acres of presently owned land could be disposed of at
some point in time, either for the use of another level of government or to offset other
purchases. Among these lands were some 1,200 acres of land now administered by the Fish and
Wildlife Division. In all these cases, the land so noted is an irregular parcel separated from the
recommended major recreational complex by a road or other boundary. In all cases, these lands
would not detract from the value of the area, and in some cases, they have excellent trading
potential. One such area is the Primehook Wildlife Area, a 635 acre tract, completely enclosed
by present and proposed federal acquisitions. This area could be the basis for a future trade with
federal agencies for lands more appropriately located.

Other lands recommended for long-range disposition include 1,500 acres of forest holdings
most of which average less than 200 acres in size. Examples of these areas are the scattered small
parcels in the Blackbird Forest, the Owens tract, and the smaller parcels near Redden. These
areas could be useful for county recreational facilities, or they could be sold to provide funds
for acquisitions desirable to complete the Redden and Blackbird Forest Preservations.

By continued re-evaluation of the State's recreation ownerships and through selective
dispositions to help offset some of the acquisition burden, the overall program will become
more efficient and more responsive to the outdoor recreation need.

169

THE IMPACT OF THE STATE'S PROGRAM

The State's program, if fully implemented, would provide an instant capacity of over
140,000 persons engaged in a wide variety of outdoor recreation pursuits or about one half of
the total projected instant capacity needed for all pursuits by the year 2000. This program
would have a substantial impact on specific deficiencies noted in the Needs Section and on the
efforts to preserve and protect the State's natural resources.

The program will provide for the acquisition and availability for public outdoor recreation
use of some 83,800 acres by the year 2000, or 57,548 acres in addition to the present State
inventory. These additional acres will include over 30,000 acres of additional protected bay and
coastal wetland and 20,000 acres of additional woodlands. It will also provide for protection of
almost 3,000 acres of impounded water for fishing and boating, including some 800 acres within
30 minutes of the State's most urban concentrations.

In terms of specific facility needs, the program would provide instant capacity for over
33,000 picnicking or about half the total projected instant deficiency for this activity. This level
of action is probably appropriate as picnic facilities are a primary element of virtully every
outdoor recreation area of all jurisdictions. Hence, much of the remaining need would be well
met at county, local, and federal parks and areas.

Ocean swimming, another very popular activity in Delaware, is also well served by the
proposed program. While the actions during the initial phases of the action program are designed
primarily as an upgrading of present facilities the impact of State action during the plan period
will be to greatly increase the capacity for this pursuit. The impact is especially noticeable in
Cape Henlopen where the State actions would increase the capacity by almost 12,000 persons.
Substantial additions are also programmed at Delaware Seashores State Park where capacity
could be increased by as much as 30,000 users, primarily through new access points and
expanded parking.

Swimming capacities in both ponds and in artificial pools will be increased by the State's
actions through: the proposed pool or beach complex at White Clay Creek; the proposed pools
at Brandywine Creek, at Lums Pond, and at Killens Pond; and by beach improvements at Trap
Pond. These actions will increase the instant capacities by 16,000 users.

The areas available for hunting during the period would provide a substantial increase in
future instant capacities to over 5,600 compared to the 2,300 present capacity.

Fishing and boating needs will also be accommodated by-the fishing and boating facilities
proposed in the State Parks and by continuation of the pond and marine access programs. These
actions will increase instant capacities by over 13,000 users. Other uses will also be increased,
especially hiking, camping, nature study, and active play, if the achievement of the
recommended program is realized. Camping capacities, for example, would be increased by over
9,1 00users.

It is expected that the users of Delaware's outdoor recreational areas will find many outlets
for their energies in a setting which - allows a highly satisfying experience consistent with
preservation and efficient use of our natural resources.

170

FEDERAL LANDS AND PROGRAMS

The federal government has plans to acquire approximately 4,000 acres to complete its
wildlife holdings at Bombay Hook and Primehook. These areas, when complete, will encompass
over 26,000 acres under administration of the U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and
Wildlife Service. These two areas are part of a system of federal wildlife refuges established for
ihe protection of migratory waterfowl along their Atlantic Flyways.

These areas are primarily nature study oriented, although, as noted in the assessment of State
wildlife areas, some hunting is permitted on portions of both areas. The major recreational
value, however, is derived from the opportunites to observe upland and wetland species,
especially the large Canada goose population, in their natural habitat. Specifically, the
opportunity for photography is outstanding on the Bombay Hook refuge. Other uses include
fishing and picnicking with the former use by permit only.

Federal development at the wildlife refuges has been limited to those improvements
necessary to preserve the wildlife habitat and to foster species management programs. The plan
recommends continuation of this approach.

The federal government also owns approximately 5,000 acres along the Chesapeake and
Delaware Canal under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Corps of Engineers. This land is primarily for
spoils disposal from maintenance dredging of the C and D Canal. Its recreational use is limited
by the nature of the hydraulic fill process, however, the land is open for hunting through a
license agreement between the Corps and the State Game and Fish Commission. The area is also
available for fishing, riding, and for nature study, and most of the Canal frontage is accessible by
motor vehicle.

The Corps has long-range plans to devote portions of their land to recreational uses, mainly
picnicking and fishing. The major areas so designated in Delaware include the south bank at
Reedy Point and the north and south banks at Summit Bridge. In all three cases, major
development will be access roads, overlooks, picnic facilities, and fishing piers. The north bank
of Summit Bridge will be developed in accordance with the plans for Lum's Pond State Park.
Based on total parking of 490 vehicles (sum of all three sites) these areas will accommodate
approximately 1,200 persons. Preliminary development plans for these areas provide for about
250 picnic tables to serve these users. More extensive development of these federally-owned
areas is not recommended as in most cases this would be detrimental to their natural value and
the protection of wildlife. The area could be of great value for riding and walking if proper
designation was provided to separate the recent fill from those portions that are safe for this
use. Designated riding and walking trails would work well with the Lum's Pond development
and would provide over 20 miles of shoreline (both sides of the canal) for this use. Development
of the federal land in this manner would be of great value in meeting the State's outdoor
recreation needs.

Finally, the federal government owns or has easements to lands in the Lewes-Cape Henlopen
area. The largest of these is the lands owned by the federal government for Army and Navy
purposes on Cape Henlopen. This ownership, some 823 acres, +.bisects the State park and
hampers effective outdoor recreation use of this valuable area.

The federal government, in the past, has offered portions of its holdings for lease by the
State or local governments. In these cases the leases are typically at no cost to the lessee except
for routine maintenance. The federal government retains title to property and the right to
terminate the lease if the property should be needed for its original federal-use purpose. This
type of i nter-govern mental transfer could be quite helpful in meeting outdoor recreation needs,
especially in the affected local community. A good example of the value of these leases is the
use of Corps of Engineers lands along the Lewes-Rehoboth Canal for community recreational
pursuits in the City of Lewes. Similar arrangements have been considered by the City of
Rehoboth.

171

Larger areas have been assigned to the State along the Chesapeake and Delaware Canal
(although in this case the legal document is a license rather than a lease) and portions of the
present Corps lands along this canal are recommended for inclusion in Lums Pond State Park.
The plan encourages joint action of this type to provide for outdoor recreational use of these
federal lands whenever such use would be consistent with the federal program.

Specifically, the plan recommends the continuation of federal acquisition and management
programs at Bombay Hook and Primehook National Wildlife Refuges. These areas serve a vital
purpose in the preservation of migratory waterfowl and provide passive recreational pursuits
such as nature study, photography, and bird watching. During portions of the year they also
provide more active recreation such as hunting and fishing.

The plan also encourages those federal actions necessary for navigation such as the efforts by
the Corps of Engineers in the Chesapeake and Delaware Canal and in the Lewes-Rehoboth
Canal. It also encourages the types of estuarine research currently being undertaken by this
agency.

The plan does not, however, recommend or favor federal action which would establish new,
additional federal wildlife or recreation areas. It is felt that the needs of the residents of
Delaware and visitors can be more appropriately met through state and local jurisdictions with
federal assistance provided through funding, research and planning.

One area where further federal involvement is desirable is through the Surplus Property
Program whereby lands that are surplus to federal needs (wildlife, military, navigation, etc.) are
transferred at reduced cost to the State. The federal government owns, for military use, over
823 acres in the Cape Henlopen Stae Park area, as noted above. This land is of considerable
recreational value as the available ocean-shore is an extremely popular, and limited, recreational
commodity. These lands appear to be only partially used by the military for defense purposes,
while some portions are restricted to a limited number of military personnel for their
recreational use. It is the opinion of this plan that areas suited for restricted military recreation
could be better utilized for public recreation. The population to be served includes residents
from Baltimore and Washington, areas of extensive urbanization. Further, the military appears
to not respect the natural environment of the area as evidenced by their destruction of part of a
large dune noted for its ecological value. As this area is presently used for military purposes, the
plan can only express the serious interest of the State of Delaware in obtaining these lands for
ocean-oriented recreational uses.

The -federal lands, regardless of the level of the administrative agency, can markedly
contribute to the State's inventory of outdoor recreation resources. A continuing coordinated
program involving the State and the federal government can assure that the maximum
recreational benefit is derived from these lands as well as their most efficient use for wildlife,
navigation, or other primary federal purpose.

172

LOCAL NEEDS

The State's Outdoor Recreation Plan is not intended to specifically determine the types of,
or sites for local recreational facilities as this is the proper action for county and municipal
agencies. The State, however, does have a long term interest in the local system as the local
needs are generally the most pressing. The financial constraints on local governments make
achievement of these facilities difficult, and the needs, if unmet, will ultimately be translated
into State-wide problems, such as over-crowding of State facilities or social unrest. The Plan has
incorporated the standard of 25 acres of local recreation land per thousand population as used
in the State's Comprehensive Development Plan in order to estimate the level of local need.
From this level of need, programs can be evaluated, and a long range approach developed.

Using this standard and the 1980 and 2000 population projections, the total local
recreational need, county and municipal, equals 17,872 acres and 25,000 acres respectively. The
distribution of this total need by county and the net additional need after subtraction of
present facilities are shown in Table 35.

Table 35 clearly indicates the urban concentration of the need for local recreational
facilities. These same urban areas are also those most affected by high and rising land costs, by
concentrations of low income and minority families, by serious demands on local funds for all
services, and by problems of social unrest and dissatisfaction.

Previous State actions have taken at least three different forms: financial assistance; technical
assistance; and transfer of land or facilities for local recreational uses. The results have not been
uniformly successful.

State financial assistance to county and local governments was established in Chapter 58,
Title 77 of the Delaware Code, "State Aid for Acquisition of Public Lands for Park, Recreation,
and Conservation Purposes." This chapter, which became law on November 24, 1964,
established a procedure for making State grants to the City of Wilmington and the counties
according to a set formula based on an initial allocation of $503,750.00. At the option of the
individual counties, the monies could be used by the incorporated municipalities. The initial
distribution of funds provided for:

New Castle County 39.95% $ 201,248.00
Kent County 24.03% $ 121,051.00
Sussex County 24.87% $ 125,283.00
City of Wilmington 11.15% $56,168.00

These funds were to be used on a matching grant basis with the local unit of government
providing 25 percent of the acquisition costs. As of July, 1969, this fund had not been actively
used as the following funds remained to be spent:

Percent of
Area Funds Remaining Total Remaining

New Castle County $ 53,187.50 26.42%
Kent County 29,109.00 24.04
Sussex County 41,275.00 32.94
City of Wilmington 56,168.00 100.00

Total $179,739.50 35.70%

173

TABLE35

Local Recreation Inventory, Need and Projected Deficit

1980 and 2000

Community Present 1980 1980 2000 2000
Development Inventory 1980 Recreation Deficit 2000 Recreation Deficit
Areal - - Acres2 Population Need-Acres3 Acres Population Need-Acres Acres

Wilmington (N. New Castle) 2,744 477,000 11,925 9,187 667,000 16,675 13,931

Middletown-Odessa 0 12,100 300 300 17,000 425 425

Smyrna-Clayton 38 17,150 428 390 24,000 600 562

Dover 76 62,200 1,555 1,479 87,000 2,175 2,099

Milford-Harrington 8 43,600 1,090 1,082 61,000 1,525 1,517

Georgetown 1 7,150 179 178 10,000 250 249

Seaford-Laurel 15 47,200 1,180 1,165 66,000 1,650 1,635

Millsboro-Selbyville 7 22,150 554 547 31,000 775 768

Lewes-Rehoboth 202 20,000 500 298 28,000 700 498

Bethany-Fenwick 26 6,450 161 135 9,000 225 199

STATE 3,117 715,000 17,872 14,755 1,000,000 25,000 21,883

1- Based on Community Development areas from Delaware Comprehensive Development Plan
2- Source: "Outdoor Recreation for Delaware, Inventory," August, 1968
3- Based on 25 acres per 1,000 population local recreation area standard

Two major reasons can be cited for the lack of a greater use of these funds. First, the funds
appropriated under this act cannot be combined with federal grants in order to cover the entire
cost of the acquisition. The local unit of government must provide 25 percent of the necessary
funds from their sources while both State and federal grants can be used for the remaining 75
percent. The local units of government, especially in the most urban areas, are not induced by
this program to accelerate their recreation program due to the demand for local funds for all
other needs.

The second problem involves local park areas and their lack of development. Local officials
have indicated that they would use the fund more freely if their present park areas were
developed. Local officials are not willing to acquire more park land while the majority of the
locality's present facilities are undeveloped.

The first problem can be largely overcome by a revision of the legislation to allow the local
unit of government to match the State grant to provide the necessary 25 percent to match any
federal grants. This would reduce the effective local share to 12.5 percent where federal funds
are available. Amending this legislation would require deletion of a portion of Section 5808 of
Chapter 58, Title 7. The plan recommends that this revision be instituted as soon as possible as
this would free local governments from part of the burden of allocating limited financial
resources among recreation and all other demands.

Assistance to local governments and to private non-prof it organizations is also available from
the State for use in recreation programming. This assistance, under the Recreation Assistance
Fund Act, cannot be used for capital improvements. However, it can be used at the local level to
establish park and recreation agencies, fund various recreational programs, establish outdoor
nature study facilities, provide recreational opportunities for the aged and for the
underprivileged, and to try experimental recreation programs previously not possible under
existing funds. In general, this fund functions as seed money to encourage local recreational
projects.

A total of 32 applications were funded in 1969 from the initial appropriation of $300,000,
and the applications for 1970 have virtually depleted the 1970 appropriation. This record
indicates both a major need and a proper role for State funds. It is possible that continuation of
this "seed money" approach to recreation programming would permit reallocation of some of
the funds of the local government and the local service clubs from programming to construction
of needed facilities. As locally derived needs should be reflected in local park development,
direct State involvement in that decision seems less reasonable than the program assistance role
provided for in the Recreation Assistance Fund.

The State has in the past transferred outdoor recreation facilities and sites to the local level
of government. These transfers have occurred when the existing facility assumed a character
more like that of a local facility or when the site was unappropriate for a State facility due to its
size or location. Examples of these transfers are the pending transfer of Brandywine Springs
State Park and the administrative transfer of Beck's Pond Fishing Area, both of which will be
operated by the New Castle County Parks Department. An example of a site transfer, also to the
New Castle County Parks Department, involved the former Delcastle State Prison Farm now
used for a park and county golf course, and developed with Land and Water Conservation
Funds.

As indicated earlier in the reassessment of present ownerships, other parcels could be
transferred to local governments for outdoor recreation uses as needed. Many of these parcels
are well suited for local parks. These transfers are equivalent to a 100 percent grant as the
locality needs no funds for acquisition. However, the local,unit must assume maintenance costs
for existing improvements and the problem of development remains. Nevertheless, this program
does enlarge the local inventory and redistributes outdoor recreation facilities by function and
responsibility. On this basis, the transfer program should be continued.

175

Most recently the State has provided a Local Park Land Assistance Program intended to serve
as a grant-in-aid for county and local park land acquisition, development and related planning.
Passage of this program marks the first time state aid has been available for local park
development projects. These funds were appropriate to the Department of Natural Resources
and Environmental Control, which in turn shall allocate the same among the county and local
governments of Delaware according to the following population ratio:

(1)Sixteen percent (16%) to Kent County and local governments within Kent County
($80,000);

(2) Fourteen percent (14%) to Sussex County and local governments within Sussex County
($70,000);

(3)Seventy percent (70%) to New Castle County and local governments within New Castle
County ($350,000).

As can be seen, the emphasis is for park development in New Castle County and its local
governments, reflecting the concentration of population in these highly urban areas.

The funds appropriated by this Act will be allocated on a matching basis with the State share
being not more than 50 percent of the total project cost. Any monies received from the State or
Federal governments under any other program may be used in a program of a county or local
government, along with the funds appropriated by this Act, but in no case can the local share be
less than 25 percent of the total project cost.

Each applicant must provide evidence to the Department of Natural Resources and
Environmental Control that local funds have been earmarked and will be expended'for their
matching share of a project's cost. No funds will be made available to a county or local
government for park improvements which have a public-use expectancy of less than twenty (20)
years. Documentation must also be provided by the applicant that has means by which to
sufficiently operate and maintain such park improvements once completed.

It should be noted that the relatively small sum appropriated by this Act ($500,000) makes
it impossible to consider very large development projects for funding, such as golf courses and
large community centers. This is in keeping with the intent of the program to assist the
development of facilities which meet the most pressing local needs.

Passage of this development assistance program comes after a number of years of
consideration during which it was realized that the State's needs would prevent more than
minimal use of the Land and Water Conservation Fund for local uses. With passage of this
program, and given the fact that any state action serves both local and state users due to the size
of the State, the Land and Water Conservation Fund will continue to be used primarily for state
projects.

Delaware is now probably the only state to provide assistance to local governments for all
phases of recreation. State programs provide for acquisition, planning, development and
recreation programming. Now that a complete program is available, the magnitude of assistance
and the procedures for such assistance should be annually reviewed and adjusted as necessary. It
is too early for this plan to include programs for acquisition and development at the local level
which reflect a comprehensive approach. This approach will be encouraged through the
administration of State aid, will be presented in future updatings of the local action program,
and will be a major area of interest in the urban recreation study proposed by this plan.

176

PRIVATE ACTION

A document such as this Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan cannot easily determine
the specific role and responsibility of private enterprise or of the private conservation group. In
the first instance, the profit motive must be clearly recognized as part of any activity engaged in
by private enterprise, and by virtue of this relationship, private enterprise will not provide
facilities or services from which it cannot receive a fair return.

In the second case, the pure conservation motive is most clear, often to the point of serious
limitation on use. It must be recognized and understood that these pure conservation motives
are as reasonable as those of profit or use, that the efforts of the conservation groups may offer
a chance of a more efficient allocation of public resources by allowing the use of public money
to meet active needs as well as to preserve resources for future recreational needs.

In -both cases, the actions of these two segments of the private sector can contribute to the
satisfaction of needs if proper encouragement is given by public agencies and their programs.
The following are offered as guides to stimulate such participation:

The State and other public bodies should carefully evaluate the services they provide and
the possibility of the provision of identical services by the private sector. Particularly
important is the minimization of unfair competition between public and private
developments. The most noticeable example of this problem is the State's campground
fee of $2 per night on the prime recreational lands with most utilities and other services -
a charge which far undercuts the breakeven point for private campgrounds located on less
choice sites. The result is marginal private operations, which largely serve to handle State
overflow on peak days. Such as imbalance fosters poor management and a lack of private
reinvestment.

2. Development and uniform application of appropriate laws, regulations, and ordinances
upon both public and private recreational facilities is essential. The public unit should
clearly set the example.

3. Full consideration should be given to the lease arrangement as is suggested in the policy
portion of this plan. This study is of the opinion that the lease arrangement for many
services can be especially beneficial in terms of reduced costs to the State. The lease
arrangement may also be of value for many of the wildlife management needs, for interim
use of future recreational lands, and for early provision of recreational facilities on a
parcel prior to State development.

4. Various tax reduction or deferment plans can be explored which would encourage
continued private recreational development or maintenance of an area. This could be
particularly valuable in urban cases where rising land values and taxes place special
burdens on recreational activities.

5. Cooperation should be paramount between the public and the private groups, commercial
or non-profit, in regard to coordination of efforts, technical assistance, and in mutual
exchange of data on demand, markets, costs, and management. Much of this cooperation
could be achieved by increased contact between the public agencies and the various
groups, committees, and organizations interested in conservation or recreation.

Action in this regard, along with a careful evaluation of all State fee proposals, should go far
in stimulating a viable private interest, to the advantage of the outdoor recreation participant
and to the economy.

177

As indicated in the assessment of responsibilities, privately owned and operated outdoor
recreation facilities are vital to the satisfaction of the total demand. Recreation business, a
"tourism," contributes considerably to the economy of the State. Its many forms range from
actual recreational facilities such as marinas and horseback riding to a host of services including
food, entertainment, and accommodations. Tourism is the chief industry in Sussex County,
contributing heavily to the economy of Rehoboth Beach and other resort communities. It has
been estimated that the tourist industry generated over 100 million dollars in trade in 1967.
Clearly, the potential for private action is clear.

Private enterprise should accept its responsibility to provide those facilities for which it is
best suited, including such things as deluxe campgrounds, motels and hotels, restaurants, and
resort entertainment. It should, however, accept the coincident responsibility to work with
government to create and enforce effective regulations to protect the natural resources on which
the "recreation business" is built.

The private conservation group, on the other hand, can play an equally important role in
providing the impetus for public action to protect these resources through their own acquisition
and management, and in conducting a broad-based program of public education. In Delaware
various groups and organizations such as Delaware Wildlands, the Sierra Club, various crime and
social organizations, and sportsmen's clubs can continue to make a major contribution to the
protection and wise use of the State's valuable natural resources.

178

IMPLEMENTATION TECHNIQUES

The need to protect the State's outdoor recreation resources is clear as is the need to make
recreational experiences available for Delaware's residents and for visitor's. Preparation of a plan
for State action is only half of the total effort necessary to protect these resources and provide
for their use. The other half of the effort is to determine what means are available for
implementing this plan and to select among those which offer the greatest potential.

Essentially, the State may make use of three broad powers: the power to acquire; the power
o regulate; and the power to tax. The same powers can also be used at the local level, although
in all cases their application must be within the context of legislative authorization. This section
t

will evaluate the methods available for implementing the plan.

ACQUISITION

The process of "acquiring property" involves a mutual transfer of rights to the use and
enjoyment of the property. If all the rights are transferred, the buyer gets fee simple title and
exclusive use. Lesser rights may also be purchased, in which case the seller retains some ability
to use the property subject, however, to the stipulations contained in the sale of certain rights
to the buyer (i.e., life use, access, type of use).

Fee Simple Acquisition

Fee simple acquisition is the most costly, but it is generally preferable to lesser interests in
situations where strategic land parcels are needed or where unrestricted use of and control over
the property is essential to its efficient use. Lesser interests, however, come at a reduced cost
and are of considerable value for preserving the existing character of a property or for
preventing adverse future development. Delaware's present natural resource and outdoor
recreation holdings are in fee simple because they are of strategic value in the outdoor
recreation system and because the exclusive use feature is most conclusive to management and
development needs. It is conceivable, however, that lesser interests would be appropriate
especially as part of the "surround" necessary to the overall environments of parks and wildlife
areas,

Acquisition may take many forms, the most common being a direct sale or transfer which
often takes the form of an option or agreement to buy at a future date with a subsequent
transfer when funds are available at a later date. Other forms include use of a lease with an
option, installment purchase at a preagreed price, purchase and leaseback, and purchase and
resale with covenants. Under the lease with an option approach, the land is first leased for the
proposed use with an option attached allowing the governmental agency to acquire the property
if desired during the life of the lease at an agreed upon price. This technique is most useful when
a private recreational facility is available for present purchase but funds for acquisition may be
delayed. The lease allows for continuance of the facility and the option provides for a future
purchase. This technique could be of greatest value at the local level where suitable private
facilities may be available.

The installment purchase approach, which provides for staged sale, is useful where an
individual wishes to sell a large holding but may wish to have the sale spread over a period of
time for tax reasons. It is also valuable for the purchasing government as it allows for
programming of funds over time while guaranteeing the eventual ownership. This technique has
not been fully utilized in Delaware due to the administrative inability of one legislature to bind
a subsequent one to appropriate acquisition funds. It has been used in some cases where a sale
could be spread over a calendar or tax year if all the funds were available, and in this regard it is
worthy of continued use.

179

The purchase-leaseback and the purchase-resale techniques are essentially similar. In both
cases, the governmental body acquires the property in fee simple and then returns it to private
use subject either to a lease agreement or to covenants in the resale. In the first case the
prOperty is acquired in advance of use but returned to a present use until needed. In the second,
the property is no longer held by the government but future use must conform to the policies
established in the area. Neither approach has had widespread application in Delaware as most of
the acquisitions are in or planned for early recreation or wildlife uses. The leaseback concept in
limited form has been applied, however, to some Game and Fish lands with success. Given the
pressures for acquisition and the financial limitations for purchase and eventual development,
the purchase-leaseback approach seems to hold some merit. The State could acquire the lands
necessary for its outdoor recreation system but defer some of the cost by allowing the lands to
be used for restricted private purposes under a lease. It is recommended that this approach be
more fully utilized, especially in regard to forest lands, the wetlands along the inland bays, and
for long-range development portions of the State parks.

The purchase-resale approach is of more limited value as it involves considerable
administrative effort in a purchase and then a resale transaction and gains only limited rights in
the property. The purchase of the desired rights alone would seem more appropriate. The
approach could be of some value where limited rights are essential to recreational or other
programs and where the original owner is not willing to sell less than fee simple title.

Usually fee simple title is acquired through negotiation between the governmental body and
the seller at prevailing market price. In some, however, the necessity for the purchase may be
constrained by an unwilling seller. This problem was touched upon in the Special Problems
Section. In such cases, the governmental agency may use its power of eminent domain under
which title is transferred to the government and the landowner is paid just compensation. The
legalities, the delays with court action, and the "bad will" involved in the use of this technique
make it relatively unattractive except in cases of very strategic parcels. It is recommended that
in cases where the use of eminent domain appears unavoidable, the entire project be carefully
reviewed to determine the actual value of the parcel in question.

Another form of acquisition is the "life tenancy." This procedure operates in much the same
manner as a fee simple acquisition in that the title rests in the governmental body and the
property owner is paid for his transfer. The major difference is that the former owner has the
right to retain his residence on the property during his lifetime along with use of a reasonable
area surrounding the residence. The remainder of the property is available for outdoor
recreation use.

The main advantages of this approach is that the land is available prior to the death of the
land owner when he would otherwise not be willing to sell due to a desire to remain in his
long-time residence. The use of the life tenancy can be of conside.rable'value in scheduling of
land acquisition for a recreation area and it reduces the problems arising from estate settlement
and negotiation with heirs. Its use should be considered wherever applicable to accelerate
Delaware's program.

Lands may also be acquired through gift or bequest, foreclosure for tax reasons, and
exchange. In these cases, the full title is transferred, often without cost or for nominal cost, and
the land is made available for public use. While the State should not count on lands from these
sources it should seek ways to stimulate desirable land gifts. A major promotion outlining the
tax advantages of such gifts to their owners and the high value of such lands in helping the State
meet its needs would seem appropriate in this regard. This promotional emphasis should extend
to archaeological and historic building and sites as well as raw land as the need for preserving
these resources is paramount to the need for unimproved land.

180

Tax delinquent lands could be taken for recreational uses, especially at the municipal or
county level as these areas typically are within an urban area, are generally small in size, and
frequently are located within residential subdivisions.

The acquisition of land by exchange has been examined in the reassessment of present
ownerships. Essentially, this practice does not substantially increase the total inventory of land
but rather redistributes this inventory in a manner more conducive to proper management and
development. The use of this technique is strongly recommended in regard to Fish and Wildlife
Areas where some parcels extend beyond a natural area boundary. To whatever degree possible,
these could be exchanged for lands within the desired boundary thereby saving on acquisition
cost and aiding in the utilization of the area.

Acquisition of Lesser Interests

The techniques applicable to fee simple title can also be used in the acquisition of lesser
interests. Generally, however, the lesser interest is obtained in a sale agreement covering the
appropriate interest desired without the necessity for optiods or leases. The major advantages to
the acquisition of lesser interest, or easements, is that the governmental body can achieve its
goal of preserving open space without the necessity of taking full title. The private landowner
retains the title to the land and can use it for any use that does not violate the rights conveyed
to the governmental body, and the property remains on the tax rolls.

The purchase of lesser interests can prevent adverse development, can guarantee the right of
the public access, or can provide for the protection of a natural resource such as a watercourse
or woodland. Where this limited protection or right of access is desired, the use of an easement
may be of value, however, this technique is not without limitation. The acquis ition of an
easement involves a substantial outlay of funds at one time 'often almost as much cash as would
have been required for fee simple title. Further, the lesser interests are difficult to transfer at a
later date should the government decide to no longer make use of its right of the property.
These limitations have generally precluded use of the lesser interest approach. However, it
should be evaluated by the natural resource agencies and by local governments where the cost is
justified and where the purchase of such interest represents the extent of the governmental
body's concern with the specific parcel. Appropriate use of this technique would be for
protection of the character of the area surrounding a recreational facility or for guarantee of
public use on a drainage project where no major recreation improvements are anticipated.

REGULATION

The power to regulate the use of land is typically delegated to county and municipal
governments in the form of zoning and subdivision regulations. Additionally, some powers are
retained by the State to regulate the effects of land uses on water and the atmosphere. These
powers can be used to preserve open space and to protect the environment of outdoor
recreational areas.

Zoning

Zoning regulates land use by establishing several kinds of districts and establishing the types
and densities to which the land may be used. Zoning, however, does not assume that a use of
the land produces a public benefit but rather assumes that such use is not injurious to the
@ublic. Zoning does, however, increase the amount of land available for outdoor recreation use
in general, although portions of such land may be restricted to specific groups such as the
residents within the district.

181

A number of types of zoning can be utilized depending on the purpose for the zone and the
character of the proposed uses. Cluster zoning or average density zoning provides open 'space by
retaining the overall density in a given area but allowing clustering of development for the most
efficient use of land. The result has been open space for recreational use, although it is
sometimes the unuseable left-over portions. Floodplain zoning preserves stream and river banks
and prevents flood damage costs by prohibiting development in areas subject to flooding. Ste ep
slope zoning may be used to retain property in excess of 20 percent slope in a low density
development with restricted uses. The foregoing are more effective in preserving open space
than the following, which are more susceptible to development pressures. Estate (or large-lot)
zoning and agricultural zoning provide open space by 2-5 acre minimum lot sizes that protect
farmlands and low-density residential use. Other zoning districts include: conservation districts
to protect natural areas, forestry districts, resort districts, commercial recreation districts,
shoreline districts, and airport and flight hazard zones. Professor Ian McHarg of the University
of Pennsylvania proposes that riparian land districts, underground water resource districts,
wildlife districts, and geologic districts be established prohibiting all incompatible uses. Most of
these approaches are of greatest value to local governments; however, the State may wish to
explore the use of flood plain and conservation zones as a means of protecting the areas it may
wish to eventually acquire. Open space or conservation zoning involves considerable regulation
of the use of land, generally limiting use to recreational or agricultural pursuits. This type of
zoning, whether at the State or at a local level, has not been subjected to widespread use
because of the difficulty in proving the value of the permitted uses and the adverse effect of the
uses that are restricted. However, where such values could be state, such as in the wetlands, it is
possible that this zoning would be enforceable. If so, the use of the technique would help
protect resource lands, at least until they could be acquired.

The use of flood plain zoning is another means of protecting natural resources and providing
open spaces. Many of the State's watercourses are still lined with undeveloped land, bu-t
development is encroaching in most areas in spite of the history of flood damage when these
waters exceed their boundaries. Since floods are a natural occurrence, and since such. flooding
can be detrimental to the public welfare, it appears that institution of flood plain zoning could
reduce the hazard and at the same time preserve open space. The resulting open space would be
valuable for hiking and riding trails, nature study, and any recreational uses which do not
disturb the natural character or require major improvements. While this tool tends to preserve
lineal open spaces more suited to local recreational needs than State needs, the technique could
be of value where State recreational areas encompass or abut a watercourse. The application of
zoning would aid in the protection of the resource outside the State's facility so that private
actions would not increase the risk of flood damage to the facility as well as protect the
character of the facility's environs.

Official Map

Another method of protecting open space and recreational lands is the use of an official
map. This device regulates development in areas officially designated for public uses. In most
cases, it is limited to a specified time period, usually three years, after which the governmental
body must purchase the property or forfeit control. The advantages of this approach include the
ability to prepare plans without the immediate necessity of purchase and a period of time
during which to assess development concepts or other aspects relating to the proposed use of
the parcel. After further examination within the designated period, the government can either
acquire the parcel or forfeit it. This* approach could be very useful where a proposed take-line
for a park has been established by master planning but where acquisition of the entire area is
not immediately possible.

182

The authority to use this technique has been delegated to the local government in Delaware,
although in at least one case the wording of the legislation does not provide for future
acquisition. The ability of the State to use this device is less clear especially as its use would
require legislative approval and would probably be limited to two year periods as one legislature
may not bind a subsequent one.

Subdivision Regulations

Recreation and open space areas may also be provided through subdivision regulations. These
controls typically require that a developer set aside land for recreational uses, and often they
require some development thereon. Since this approach is an exercise of the police power, the
requirements must be uniform, uniformly applied, and reasonable. At the present time no
reasonable standards are available; however, most ordinances specify somewhere between 3 and
12 percent of the total developable area to be so dedicated. The wishes of the locality are the
best indicator of the appropriate standard and should be reflected in the amendment of or
preparation of subdivision regulations.

The areas obtained under these regulations are of the most local type; therefore, this
technique has little relevance to the State's need. Proper administration at the local level,
however, can link or distribute the areas to provide a variety of recreational experiences at little
cost to the governmental body. Since these areas could provide for a substantial portion of the
local need, the technique of requiring such dedication holds considerable value for these
governmental units, and the use of the approach is highly recommended.

TAXATION

It is neither feasible nor desirable for public agencies to purchase all the land necessary to
implement open space and recreation goals. Zoning is a useful, tool as are other regulatory
devices. However, proper tax policy can strengthen these techniques.

Under tax deferral procedure, taxes on privately held open space land may be regularly
assessed but are deferred until the land is sold for development. Tax deferral must be based on a
land use plan and supplemented by other land use devices such as zoning.

A tax rebate procedure allows a percentage of the taxes to be rebated each -year as long as
the open space regulations remain in force. If the zoning results in non-open space uses, all
rebated taxes fall due, in some cases with interest. Tax exemptions are often authorized for land
that provides a public benefit (private lands open to public hunting and fishing; hiking and
riding trails; and historic sites). However, such tax exemptions must be tied to a land use plan.
Tax concessions applied to property, inheritance, or income taxes, offer an incentive for land or
easement donations.

Under the preferential assessment approach, land is assessed at its agricultural value in order
to remove tax pressures on owners to sell at a speculative profit. By itself, this approach does
not preserve open space but merely gives an owner a continuing tax advantage and does not
impede eventual sale for development at considerable p.rofit. It must be accompanied by
regulations restricting land to open space uses; it must be tied to a land use plan; there must be
provision for recapturing the land value increment achieved during the preferential assessment
period; and the locality must be compensated for any loss of revenue.

183

A form of preferential assessment is presently conducted under the Delaware Farmland
assessment law which determines the tax on agricultural lands based on the potential
productivity of soil groups. The tax is determined upon this productivity when devoted to.
agricultural, horticultural or forest uses. This procedure, however, should be reviewed for its
effectiveness in preserving open space, its relationship to area development plans, and in regard
to methods of recapturing the deferred tax when the agricultural uses cease.

OTHER METHODS

In addition to exercising the power to acquire, to regulate, and to tax land, open space may
be obtained through intergovernmental cooperation, such as the recreational use' of water
supply reservoirs and military installations. Another tool is private acquisition by groupssuch as
conservation societies. Delaware has been successful in the past in the latter regard ' H owever,
more interest and assistance could be generated by closer cooperation between. all natural
resource agencies and the private conservation groups, including a more complete exchange of
plans and programs.

Additionally, much evaluation is necessary relative to the use of present powers and their
interpretation. Frequently, the authority provided under the powers to acquire, regulate or tax
are not interpreted beyond the exact letter of the law. In essence, most governmental units have
not fully utilized their power to negotiate in regard to the specific powers. Often an
opportunity may exist whereby the exercise of a specific power may legitimately provide for
the creation of an agreement or "deal" between the governmental agency and, the landowner.
Where this is possible the government's goals in achieving a recreational complex or other
facility may be improved by a negotiated agreement. There is a great need to provide flexibility
in administration so as to interpret the application of the tools at hand, provided such exercise
is fair and within the broad intent of the law.

Further, the concept of compensation for reserved rights or for continuation of present uses
should be fully explored. A recent proposal from the 1961 Penjerdel Open Space Conference
would provide for compensable regulations whereby a landowner would be compensated for
open space restrictions imposed under the power to regulate. This approach would relieve some
of the harshness of present open space zoning by compensating a landowner for any value lost
in keeping the property in open space or recreational uses. Furthermore, compensation could be
provided to encourage private recreational programs and private facilities to remain available to
the public where these are compatible with governmental purposes and goals. In both cases, the
need for governmental action, especially in regard to direct purchase or development, is
reduced, and the outdoor recreational need is more completely met.

Finally, the lease arrangement can be used to provide an outdoor recreational experience
which could not otherwise be provided. While this approach may be handicapped by difficulties
when the lease is due for renewal, the approach has some value when a facility is available to
serve a present need but no funds are available for the direct provision of the service by the
governmental body.

As can be seen, there are a wide variety of tools available for implementi ng outdoor
recreation plans and programs. The critical issue is to determine which tools are most
appropriate given the need, the administrative requirement for individual facilities, and the
mechanics of establishing the machinery to make use of the particular approach.

184

SOURCES OF FUNDS

Funds for implementing the State's Outdoor Recreation Action Program and for local
outdoor recreation facilities are available from federal and State sources. The federal funds are
of the matching grant type with the State or locality required to provide some portion of the
necessary total cost. The major federal programs which can be used for open space and outdoor
recreation planning and acquisition include:

A. U.S. Department of the Interior:

1. Land and Water Conservation Fund - this fund, administered by the Bureau of Outdoor
Recreation, provides 50 percent federal grants for planning, acquiring, or developing
outdoor recreation areas. This plan is prepared under these funds. The State of Delaware
receives annually some $500,000 which with State funds allows for acquisition of
$1,000,000 of outdoor recreation land. Funds from this source have and will continue to
play a major role in Delaware's program. These funds also may be transferred to local
governments if the State desires, however, because of the existence of State aid programs
for local open space acquisition (and the poor use record of these State funds) the Land
and Water Conservation Fund monies have been essentially used for State acquisitions.

2. Federal Aid in Sport Fish Restoration Act and Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act -
these two acts provide 75 percent grants to the State Fish and Wildlife agency for
acquisition, development, research, and restoration projects which are part of that
agency's major programs. The funds, administered by the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and
Wildlife, amounted to approximately $213,000 in the current fiscal year. Their main
value is for development and restoration projects on the present and proposed wildlife
and access areas.

3. Historic Preservation Act - this act, passed in 1966, is administered by the National Park
Service and provides grants-in-aid for planning, acquisition, protection, rehabilitation,
restoration, and reconstruction of historic properties. The State is currently preparing an
Historic Preservation Plan under the provisions of this act.

B. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development

1. Historic Preservation Grants - these funds, equal to 50 percent of the cost of acquiring
and restoring historic sites, are provided under the Housing Act of 1961 as amended.
Grants are available to the State and localities for historic preservation purposes for those
sites and structures which can meet the criteria established in the National Register. This
program has not been funded in recent years.

2. Open Space Land Program - grants of up to 50 percent are available for acquiring,
developing, and preserving open space land for recreational or other open uses.
Additionally, grants of up to 90 percent may be made for projects that demonstrate
improved or new methods of preserving open space. While the states may receive these
funds they most frequently are used by local governments as the funds must be for
provision of open space land as part of a comprehensive area development plan.

3. Urban Beautification Act - grants of 50 percent of the cost of landscaping, walks, shelters,
lighting, benches, and other improvements are available to the State and to local
governments for urban beautification and improvement programs. Ninety percent grants
for demonstration projects are also available. These funds are of limited value for State
use but could be of considerable use at the county and local levels.

185

4. Demonstration Cities Act of 1966 - this act provides a 20 percent grant for open space
acquisition and development in metropolitan jurisdictions where substantial progress is
being made in metropolitan comprehensive planning, programming, and coordination.

5. Neighborhood Recreational Facilities Program - federal grants of up to 75 percent of the
costs of projects in designated redevelopment areas or two-thirds of the costs in other
areas are available from this fund. The funds may be used for new construction or for
expanding, acquiring additional area for, or rehabilitating existing recreational facilities.
These funds should be of great value to local governments, especially in urban areas.

C. U.S. Department of Agriculture

1 .Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act of 1962 - this act provides up to 50
percent of the acquisition and development of land in small watershed projects for flood
prevention, irrigation, sediment control, drainage, fish and wildlife developments, and for
public recreation. These funds are being used in the development of the Upper Choptank
Watershed and the future Tappahanna Lake in Kent County.

2. Loans for Recreational Enterprises - funds are available 'to private landowners and farm
associations for conversion of some farm acreage to recreational uses. While this is a loan
program rather than a grant, private landowners in rural areas could use these funds to
establish camping facilities or other recreational facilities to help meet the outdoor
recreation demand. Other USDA programs include certain credits for development of
income-producing recreation on private farms and guidance in the recreational
development of private woodlands.

3. The Greenspan Program - this program under the Cropland Adjustment Program provides
grants of up to 50 percent of the cost of taking land out of agricultural use for
conservation or recreational purposes. The funds are available to both local and State
agencies for acquisition, for developing wildlife facilities, for water and air pollution
prevention, and for the establishment of land conservation practices. These funds have
not been actively used in Delaware.

D. U.S. Department of Defense

1. Water Resource Development Projects - this program provides for the acquisition or
leasing of lands at reservoir sites and other water resource projects and for development
of adjacent recreational facilities. At non-reservoir sites this program may provide up to a
50 percent grant for development of recreational facilities but not costs of land or
maintenance.

2. Beach Erosion Control - this program provides up to 50 percent of the construction cost
for protecting publicly owned beaches and up to 70 percent for protecting public shore
parks or conservation areas. No funds are provided for normal maintenance and repairs.
Periodic beach nourishment may be approved for a specified time.

3. Navigation in River and Harbors - this program provides 50 percent of the first cost of
small boat harbors used for recreational boating. Maintenance cost of the general
navigational features is at Federal expense.

E. U.S. Department of Transportation

1. Highway Beautification - an amount equal to 3 percent of the federal funds apportioned
for federal-aid highways is allocated for roadside development which includes controlled
rest and recreation areas. Matching State funds are not required.

186

F. General Services Administration

1. Disposal of Federal Surplus Real Property - real property no longer needed by the federal
government is offered for conveyance to local governments for public use, i.e., parks
where the local agency must pay half its f ai r market val ue, as a wi Idl ife conservation area,
or as a public airport.

G. Water Resources Council

1. Water Resources Planning - grants are provided for comprehensive water and related
resources planning.

State funds are also available for open space and outdoor recreation programs including the
annual capital budget, the Advanced Land Fund for the Department of Natural Resources, the
Open Space Assistance Fund for local recreational acquisitions, the Local Park Land Assistance
Program for local development, and the Recreation Assistance Fund for local recreational
programming. These have been discussed earlier in the section outlining the State's program and
its relationship to local jurisdictions.

Both the State and the localities should fully explore these fund sources and make maximum
use of the funds they provide. While, in many cases, the federal programs require a major
planning commitment, the outdoor recreation need is critical at al I levels and proper long-range
planning should be a first priority of every unit of government. The failure to make full use of
all available funding does not economize or retain local perogatives; it does, in fact cheat present
and future Delawareans of their natural resource heritage.

187

188

ACTION PROGRAM
189

190

ACTION PROGRAM

STATE OF DELAWARE

The major problems, issues and opportunities of the State and the programs undertaken to
resolve these in almost every instance have relevance to outdoor recreation directly or to the
environment in which the recreation experience occurs. As noted in the special problems section
and elsewhere in the plan, Delaware must be prepared to meet many challenges, not only in
terms of satisfying the demand for space and facilities but also in terms of maintaining and
improving the environment.

The action program for the State of Delaware involves both projects and studies. In the first
case, those reported herein are for the acquisition and development of outdoor recreation areas
and facilities to meet the needs of present and future residents. In the second case, additional
research is needed in many areas to further define the problems and to develop solutions. For
some problems the solutions may be development of regulations to reduce man's continuing
destruction of his environment, for others the solutions may involve delineation of additional
facilities to meet specific needs, while for certain other issues the necessary work may require
the formulation of State policies regarding land development, industrial promotion, or many
other aspects of governmental responsibility. The sections which follow, outline these efforts
both in regard to the quality of the environment and to outdoor recreation needs.

A. Scheduled Studies and Research Projects

The State of the State message of Governor Russell W. Peterson on January 14, 1970
included an executive dedication to the protection of the environment and to creation of a
model system of parks and other recreational resource lands. Specifically, the Governor's
message included the following goals:

1. To reduce crime
2. To provide more meaningful education
3. To win the war against pollution
4. To build a model State government
5. To provide more and better job opportunities
6. To protect, develop and enjoy our natural resources
7. To promote the health and welfare of all citizens
8. To provide safe, efficient movement of people and goods

As can be seen, two of the eight major goals for the State have to do with the environment
and with the natural resources, The implementation of one of these goals ,to prevent the
pollution of the environment, includes actions to be aimed at forcing corrective measures on
major pollutors, to evaluate all State facilities to make them a model for pollution control, to
regulate automobile and truck exhaust emissions, and to'enforce water quality and sewage
regulations to clean up virtually every major stream in Delaware.

The implementation of the other goal, to protect, develop and enjoy the natural resources
includes recommendations for increased capital funding for both acquisition and development,
to prepare master plans for the State's recreational facilities, and research to provide for the
proper development of the State's coastal areas.

In line with these goals, a number of studies have been proposed, some of which have been
included in the State Planning Offices' work program for three fiscal years, 1971 through 1973.
These are listed and briefly discussed below:

191

1 Environmental Deficiencies Study - The State has many areas of blight, trash, junk and
worked out borrow pits. It also has pollution problems which markedly reduce the
quality of the environment. Therefore, a study has been scheduled to begin in July, 1970
to determine the magnitude of these problems; and evaluate their impact on residential
satisfaction, visual beauty including the setting for outdoor recreation, the economy, and
public safety and welfare; and to develop policies, regulations and reuse proposal to
reduce the adverse impact.

The study will have special impact on outdoor recreation as it will examine many of
the visual intrusions on the environment as well as propose programs for their removal. Of
special interest will be the recreational re-use consideration for borrow pits, the
appropriate screening of junk yards and similar areas, and the prevention of air and water
pollution.

2. Urban Development Patterns Study - This study will examine the economics of new town
development, the role of new towns in accommodating future growth, and the
relationship between new and old towns. The study will result in State policies to guide
future development in regard to the present communities and their capacity to grow and
the need for newer urban concentrat ions. It is anticipated that this study will provide a
better insight into urbanization in Delaware then is presently available in order that
utility service, education, recreation, public health, and other functions may be more
efficiently provided.

3. State Facility Master Plans - In order to more nearly optimize the utilization of State
facilities, a master planning program was instituted several years ago. Projects to date
include Lums Pond State Park, Killens Pond State Park, and Delaware Home and
Hospital. The preparation of master plans for the State's outdoor recreation areas will be
given a very high priority during the next five years. These plans will be a prerequisite for
capital funding requests and will determine the best uses for the lands presently owned
and those to be acquired. The primary emphasis will be for master plans of the two urban
parks, White Clay Creek and Brandywine Creek, which now lack plans, and for master
planning of the Cape Henlopen- Delaware Seashores Parks and the State's inland and
coastal wetlands. Master planning will also be done for a number of the fish and wildlife
areas as part of their orderly development. These plans will insure that Delaware's
outdoor recreation resources will be most efficiently developed to meet the projected
need in a manner consistent with sound resource protection and management principles.

4. Urban Recreation Study - an evaluation of urban recreation needs and programs will be
undertaken beginning in fiscal year 1971. This plan recognizes that data on urban needs is
seriously lacking. Urban recreation needs will be specifically studied. The work envisioned
under this project includes determination of the demand for user-oriented activities,
establishment of reliable standards against which to measure need, evaluation of the
responsibilities for meeting these needs among various jurisdictions, and determination of
programs, aid formulas, legislation, and other actions necessary to resolve the urban
recreation need. An important aspect of this study will be consideration of the needs of
urban residents for nature or resource-oriented recreation. This study will attempt to
evaluate the degree to which urban resident's mobility on lack of mobility due to age,
income, auto ownership, or physical condition constrains his use of large county and state
recreation areas. This analysis will evaluate this situation and determine, the role of fhe
State in its solution. Further, the study will evaluate the effectiveness of local, state and
federal programs to provide local recreation facilities and determine how the programs
could be expanded or improved to increase the supply of local facilities.

192

5. Second Home, Recreation and Tourism Study - This study, anticipated to begin in fiscal
year 1974. The study will determine a public sector "balance of payment" schedule to
serve as a guide to future public policy regarding scope and location of the development
of the State's ocean and bay areas for second houses, recreation, and tourism. It will
attempt to:

a. Identify second home, recreation, and tourism development trends in Southern
Delaware.

b. Analyze the overall social, economic, fiscal and land use implications of such
trends.

C. Propose alternative development patterns and the state policies regarding the
provision of public services and utilities to support development in the area.

6. Marine and Coastal Affairs Study - The State Planning Office will participate in both the
data collection and analysis necessary for preparation of plans for the environmental
resources of the State as well as in coordination of the studies. Detailed economic
research and evaluation regarding specific uses of these resources will come from the
Economic Study program initiated under Delaware P-17. Detailed planning will also be
done under the planning program of Kent County and as part of the updating of the State
Development Plan. The end product of this study will be a plan and program for the wide
allocation and use of the water and land resources of the Coastal Zone, considering the
present use of the marine resources, the present quality of the resources, the potential for
use of these areas, and the procedures for proper management and protection of the
resources.

7. Recreation Demands/Needs Study - During the continuing recreation planning program a
recreation demand study will be undertaken. This study will provide basic information
necessary for future updating of the State's Outdoor Recreation Plan, including:

a. calculating present and future demand levels for specific types of public outdoor
recreation facilities

b. calculating the value to consumers and to the State of the recreation benefits
enjoyed

The short-range impact will be the use of the data for further outdoor recreation planning
under the State Facilities Program. However, with all inputs from this study, the urban
development patterns study, and the preparation of the comprehensive planning model
are complete, a rational policy towards competive land uses can be developed to be
reflected in the Delaware Development Plan.

8. Historic Preservation Plan - the Planning Office is working with the State Archivist in the
preparation of a State Historic Preservation Plan. Delaware, the "First State," has a
historic heritage of which any State can be proud. At present, a number of historic
homes, sites, structures and activities have been identified, however, no plan for
preservation of many others has been prepared. Further, with few exceptions, the present
historic facilities are not fully coordinated with other plans and programs, a situation
which tends to miss multiple use values provided by the use of the historic site for or in
conjunction with the provision of public services. This study will meet the State Historic
Plan requirements of the National Historic Preservation Act and will:

193

a. establish criteria for evaluation of historic value
b. survey existing and potential sites
c. assign historic values
d. determine priority for acquisition and restoration
e. correlate sites with other plans and programs
f. prepare plans, programs, regulations, and budgets for protection of the historic
resou rce

9. Delaware Development Plan - the original State Development Plan was prepared in 1967
as a guide for land development and public investment decisions. This Outdoor
Recreation Plan, as well as other studies by the State Planning Office, are revisions to this
original plan. Beginning in fiscal year 1971 the Development Plan will be reviewed and
completely redone. It will provide a ten-year policy guideline for State action based on an
extensive evaluation of recent development trends, emerging public policy and the
availability of more current population and economic data. This plan will provide a
reference for the annual updating of the Outdoor Recreation Plan and will relate the
programs for action of the Outdoor Recreation Plan with the overall State needs and
programs.

Other programs are currently underway or anticipated by the State's natural resource
agencies. The following represent some of the projects and programs designed to protect the
environment, to restore damaged resources, and to upgrade the quality of the outdoor
recreation experience.

Current programs of Fish and Wildlife Division include research on the breeding and life
cycle of the mosquito andbiting flies, on non-carbon chemical methods of weed control and
insect control, and on control of undergrowth on wetlands by use of methods other than the
pollution-causing traditional burning. Additionally, this agency is studying pond construction
and reconstruction programs in order to increase the availability of fresh water and salt water
recreation areas. These actions, which are on-going research efforts, are aimed primarily at
pollution control, especially the pollution caused by herbicides and insecticides, and at
improving the quality of the recreation experience without an unnecessary description of the
ecology.

Other efforts are underway by the Fish and Wildlife Division and by the Parks, Recreation,
and Forestry aimed at pollution control and improvement of the quality of outdoor recreation.
The Fish and Wildlife unit is conducting studies aimed at creating new propagation areas for
oysters and for fin fish in locations where these areas have been destroyed or in locations where
pollution can or has been controlled. Also, this unit is sponsoring research by the University of
Delaware to determine the concentrations of D.D.T. and other harmful substance in shell-fish in
order that proper regulations can be developed to attack the problem, protect the resource, and
improve the recreational benefit of these resources.

The Parks Division has programmed funds in the 1971 Fiscal Year Capital Budget Program
for feasibility studies for water and sewage along the Delaware Seashore Park and has
programmed sewer and water facilities at Lums Pond, Delaware Seashore, and Trap Pond State
Park. These efforts, by both Fish and Wildlife and Parks, are directed at reducing the risk of
damage to the environment due to pollution and at increasing the enjoyment of the recreational
experience to be provided.

194

Perhaps the major programs currently directed at protection of the environment are those
now being undertaken or planned by the Environment Control Division. This relatively new
agency has recently adopted strict water and air pollution control regulations and has begun a
major enforcement program thereon. Major effort in this regard in the last year have included
over 600 field inspections of potential air pollution cases and has initiated over 44 pollution
control measures at private and public businesses and institutions. Additionally, air quality
monitoring has begun with the installation of four primary and ten secondary monitoring
stations. Further work proposed by the agency is a two year state-wide Air Resource
Management Program funded by HEW. This program will be continued in the current fiscal year
with other grants likely thereafter for initiation of the management scheme.

Similar efforts have been underway in regard to water pollution control. Active enforcement
of the new pollution control regulations was begun along with continued surveillance and
routine water quality measurements throughout the State. Additionally, septic tank regulations
were adopted in October of 1968 and have resulted in a series of corrective actions to pollution
problems caused by improper systems. Further effort have seen regulations developed for
certification of waste water treatment plant operators. Considerable planning for regional
treatment systems has also occurred and represents the most promising long-range attack on the
problem of water pollution. A major regional system has been planned for the urban portions of
Kent County and for the resort 'communities along the Delaware coast. These systems and the
actions of the Parks Division in this area will have a tremendous impact on the problem of
pollution in the Delaware Bay and the very threatened Inland Bays.

Finally, efforts are underway to develop Water Resources Regulations which will.recognize;
the public ownership of waters; regulate well construction and water usage; license well drillers;
and, most importantly, develop policies on shoreline development, dredging, fishing and other
subsequent activities.

The above represent the current programs of the Environmental Control Division and the
State's natural resource agencies. Programs and projects of those agencies anticipated during the
next six years include:

1. Delaware Bay Study - A water quality study to determine the importance of the Bay as a
natural resource and to determine-the Bay's true recreational potential

2. Oil Spill Regulations - New laws will be adopted and inforced to fix the responsibilities
for all resulting damages. The completion date will be on or before July 1971

3. License for Septic Tank Installers - To become effective July 1971

4. Surveillance of off-shore waste dumping - the operation of all ocean gc;ing waste barges
will be closely maintained for infraction of State Laws. Beginning date April 1970

5. Controlled Open Burning - Became effective in Kent and Sussex Counties in January
1970. It has been a law in New Castle County since July 1969

6. Motor Vehicle Emission Control - A bill has been prepared for legislative approval to
prevent the operation of all vehicles which emit excessive smoke

7. State Comprehensive Plan for A ir Quality Management - Planned for implementation by
May 1970

8. Surface Water Hydrology Study - Stream gages will be utilized to obtain pertinent
information on all significant flowing streams and a correlation established between such
streams and those that have long historical records. This project is due to be completed in
July 1971

195

9. A Study of the Use and/or Mis-use of Water for Irrigation Purposes - because irrigation
constitutes a major demand on the available waters of the State, the acquisition of such
quantitative data will allow knowledgeable planning of this valuable resource.

10. Master Water Use Plan - By July 1971, all the information from the Background Studies
can be incorporated into a meaningful Master Water Use plan which in turn should be
utilized for decision making on all future planned developments. It will be flexible
enough to allow for continuous updating as further technology becomes available.

These projects plus the programmed $4 million per year of State assistance for capital
investment in sewers and sewage treatment will do much to increase the knowledge of the
natural resources and their current statue, to provide for regulations to protect the environment
from future desecration, to establish on going programs to restore resources previously
damaged, and to provide for full recreational use of the State's land, air and water,

Local actions in this regard are much more limited as most local jurisdictions lack the funds
to engage in much environmental research and the problems mostly frequently extend beyond
local boundaries, making State action necessary. Nevertheless, some local actions are
identifiable. One action is the continuation of planning studies and programs in New Castle
County for specific planning areas. In the course of these studies and the preparation of area
development plans, the environmental quality will be analyzed as an input to developmental
policy decisions. The environmental land use classifications developed by Professor Ian McHarg
are being used for these studies. Also, the potentials and setting for open spaces and recreation
is a vital element in these plans. Further, advance sewer and water quality and system studies are
being conducted and the findings implemented to provide better service to the developing and
the present areas. This effort will guide development consistent with the proper provision of
uti I ities to avoid damage to the areas resources.

Another recent action is the application by the New Castle County Planning Department for
an Office of Water Resources Research Grant (USDI) for a study of the Christina River
Watershed. This study, which will take two years to complete at a cost of approximately
$206,000, will evaluate all aspects of the water course, specifically: hydrologic, geologic and
ecologic systems and interrelationships; analysis of the impact of transportation considerations,
such as new roads or rail facilities; recreation value; water supply, quality and quantity; and
legal and managerial'structures as they relate to water resources problems in the Christina Basin.
A model for decision making and an informational framework will be established to aid in
future comprehensive planning of this area.

Action is being taken to establish long-range planning in the State's lower counties, Kent and
Sussex, and completion of comprehensive plans, zoning and subdivision ordinance revisions, and
environmental control regulations housing, plumbing, sewage disposal code, etc. is expected
within the next two years. Further, Kent County is in the process of establishing its first
recreation and parks agency, an action which will be of great value in determining that county's
response to future growth, its recreational potential, and the actions necessary to prevent the
desecration of its natural resources.

Regional actions are also underway to study the environment and establish policy
frameworks to prevent continued degradation and correct the damage of the past. The most
significant of the studies has been proposed by the Delaware River Basin Commission. This
study to encompass the entire Delaware River Estuary will take approximately five years to
complete at a cost of $2.6 million. It will evaluate the water quality of the estuary, determine
the history of degradation in the River, evaluate the structure for control of the problem among
the local jurisdictions, determine broad estuary use considerations, and recommend policies and
procedures for protection of the Delaware River and its estuarine environment. This study will
provide a valuable regional framework for the studies and programs anticipated and underway in
Delaware to protect its shoreline, wetlands, and waterways.

196

M-M MIMM M mom M MM

FIGURE 35

Continuing Work Program

Study or Project FY 71 FY 72 FY 73 After FY 73 Jurisdiction

1. Environmental Deficiencies Study State
2. Urban Development Patterns Study State
3. Facility Master Plans State
4. Urban Recreation Study State
5. Second Home, Recreation and Tourism Study State
6. Marine and Coastal Affairs Study State
7. Recreation Demand/Need Study State
8. Historic Preservation Plan State
9. State Development Plan State
10. Fish and Wildlife Studies State
11. Air Resource Management Program State
12. Delaware Bay Study State
13. Oil Spill Regulations State
14. Surface Water Hydrology State
15. Master Water Use Plan State
16. New Castle Co. Planning District Study County
17. Christina River Watershed Plan County
18. Delaware River Estuary Study Regional
19. Annual Updating of SCORP State
20. Revision to Outdoor Recreation Plan State

Finally, this Outdoor Recreation Plan will be updated annually to reflect the progress toward
achieving its goals, to incorporate new information, to allow for the input of changes in policy
or procedure, and to provide for an action program which adequately reflects the current
outdoor recreation need. It is expected that the first updating will incorporate the urban
recreation study findings to the date of the update plus a reporting of the State's efforts to
develop state-wide rivers and trails systems as encouraged under P.L. 90-542 and P.L. 90-543.
Toward the end of the period of eligibility established for this plan a full scale Outdoor
Recreation Planning Project will be initiated to assure that Delaware will continue to provide
the highest possible level of quality and quantity of outdoor recreation experience for its
residents and quests.

B. Acquisition and Development - State of Delaware

In addition to studies, regulations, and State aid for environmental control, there is a great
unmet need for land for recreational use and for development of present and future outdoor
recreation lands for use. As noted, the State's program includes the acquisition of 34,950 �_ by
1980'and an additional 22,600 acres � by 2000 to provide an inventory of 61,000 acres � and
83,000 acres � in the two periods respectively.

Priorities

Not all of the program can be achieved at one time due to limitations imposed by the
availability of funds, the administrative capacity to acquire and develop lands, and the time
required for proper master planning. Therefore, priorities must be established which reflect the
capacity of the State to carry out its program and the most urgent areas of need or concern.

The establishment of priorities requires a careful review of each type project and a
commitment from the natural resource agencies to hold to the established priority until
conditions warrant a revision. It should be noted that a review of the priorities based upon the
record of the previous year is specified in each annual action program. The priorities themselves
fall into categories within two groupings: acquisition and development.

Acquisition Priorities

As indicated in the description of the State's program, all acquisition projects have an "A" or
first priority. This is in keeping with the realization that land for outdoor recreation use is
continually lost to other uses, especially in the most urban portions of the State. The
acquisition priorities fall into three categories which reflect the type of area and its specific
acquisition program. The three categories-are:

A.1 Urban Serving Recreation Areas:

This category is for the designation of acquisition projects for the urban-serving
recreation areas such as White Clay Creek, Brandywine Creek and Lum's Pond State
Parks, and such lands which clearly serve the residents of the urban portions of the State.
It also provides for assistance to municipal governments and organizations for acquisil
@ion of areas which are of high potential for satisfying the center-city, urban need.

A. 1 Protection of the Coastal and Bay Wetlands:

This category designates areas where the proposed acquisition;is primarily in response-to.
the critical need to preserve and properly manage the State's coastal wetlands for marine
ecology purposes. While these areas may also provide for a variety of active and passive
uses characteristic of other acquisition categories, the over-riding concern is the continued
loss of the wetlands.

198

A.2 Implementation of the Overall Program:

This category provides for the majority of land acquisition projects in accordance with
the acquisition schedule and the goals and objectives of the Outdoor Recreation Plan.
Included are the acquisition of lands at the various State parks, forests, and wildlife areas,
and the continuation of the programs of fishing pond and boat access areas.

A.3 Projects of Opportunity:

This category recognizes that desirable parcels must frequently be acquired when offered
by their owner regardless of the scheduling of acquisition specified in the plan. Often, a
delay in acquisition may result in permanent loss or in considerable difficulty and higher
cost of purchase at a later date. This category also provides for flexibility in the State's
program to allow for unique or unforeseen projects of great merit in meeting urban needs,
protecting the wetlands and other vital resources, or otherwise fulfilling outdoor
recreation needs. Hence, "projects of opportunity" include both opportunities for
accelerated purchase and opportunities to improve the overall outdoor recreation
experience through innovative and imaginative action.

Development Priorities

The plan recommends that the first priority be given to the development of those outdoor
recreation areas which have a master plan and that preparation of a master plan be a first
priority for all other outdoor recreation areas. When this priority is satisfied, all efforts should
be directed at bringing each area, park or other type of facility, to a minimum level of
development to allow public use and enjoyment. In this regard, funds should be expended in all
areas rather than concentrated in one or two areas for major development with little
development elsewhere. In the short range, however, the emphasis will be given to the urban
parks and areas and to those outdoor recreation facilities which experience an exceptionally
heavy demand.

The level of development recommended includes in parks: parking and access roads; picnic
areas; designation of trails, unorganized play areas, and nature areas; initial development of
game areas; basic sanitary facilities; and those facilities which are essential for present public
use. Each park and its planned development need evaluation to determine the exact facilities to
be provided within the intentions of this policy and the availability of funds.

In other facilities, the level of development will be that necessary to accomplish the
management objectives plus parking, picnic, and other basic improvements to allow public use.
Only basic improvements are anticipated in Wildlife Areas or Forest Preservations during the
first ten years of the period, as well as the basic development necessary at ponds and marine
accesses. In the pond and accesses, it is recommended that each site be completed in one
development effort as their size and number would make this approach more economical than
simultaneous small-scale efforts at each area.

The development priorities are based on two basic determinations: (1) all areas whether they
be parks or forests or wildlife areas must have a master plan as a prerequisite for all but the most
basic improvements; and (2) all parks and wildlife areas will be developed by 1980 to a level
which allows public utilization consistent with the goals and objectives of this plan. Based on
these determinations, the following priorities are established.

199

B.1 Master Plans:

As indicated, a master plan is considered a prerequisite for all but the most basic of
improvements. Hence, the first priority will be for the completion of master plans for all
of the State's areas.

B.2 Development in Urban-Serving Areas:

This category includes the initial development of the State's urban facilities to provide a
variety of outdoor recreational experience for the greatest number of users. Achievement
of the desired level of improvement for these areas should occur within the first six years
of the program. This category includes the State urban-serving parks, as well as assistance
in the development of high potential, urban areas by municipal governments.

B.3 Development of High Intensity Non-Urban Areas:

This category includes development programs in areas of heaviest recreational demand
outside of urban concentrations as well as additional phased development in the urban
parks. Achievement of the @desired development for this priority should occur with the
first ten years of the program.

B.4 Continuation of the State's Program:

This classification provides for development of areas of less intense use or for additional
development of the urban recreation areas beyond that of priority B.2 or B.3. It also
provides for development of areas in which the area function is being altered (-Le., from
forest to park, etc.) due to previously unanticipated demand. Development in this
classification will occur primarily after 1980 but could occur at any time during the
program if funds are available, provided all higher priorities have been satisfied.

Development action p riorities are shown in the following schedules. It should be noted that
the level of capital funding indicated represents the desirable level and not necessarily the
amount which can be funded. The amount actually funded during any capital budget
preparation will depend on the overall fiscal ability of the State and the nature of other needs.
It should also be noted that the FY 71 schedule includes projects funded in preceeding years
which will be undertaken or completed in FY 71. Depending on the level of funding, the
program could be accelerated as the indicated level of expenditure falls short of the full cost of
the program. Development schedules are included only for the first ten years of the program as
the availability of funding, the ability to undertake development, and the type of facilities
desired are subject to considerable speculation after 1980.

200

SCHEDULE I

ACQUISITION FY 71

Level of Government: State of Delaware

Priority Category & Type Acres Estimated
of Area Land Waterl Total Cost2

A-1 Urban Serving Areas 500 0 500 $1,142,400

A-1 Wetland Protection
Parks and Forests 235 0 235 1,893,000
Wildlife Areas 2.0850 0 2,850 2,425,000
Estuary 1,325 0 1,325 2,650,000

A-2 Implement State Program:
Parks and Forests 420 0 420 1,781,000
Wildlife Areas 1,350 0 1,350 404,390
Accesses & Ponds 170 65 235 153,225
A-3 Projects of Opportunity3 - -.i - -
TOTALS 6,850 65 6,915 $10,449,015

Notes: See Schedule 8

201

SCHEDULE 2

Acquisition FY 72

Level of Government: State of Delaware

Priority Category & Type Acres Estimated
of Area Land Waterl Total Cost2
A-1 Urban Serving Areas 350 0 350 $ 860tooo

A-1 Wetland Protection
Parks and Forests 95 0 95 7579400
Wildlife Areas 1,140 0 19140 970,700
Estuary 530 0 530 1,060,400

A-2 Implement State Program:
.Parks and Forests 420 0 420 1,780,800
,Wildlife Areas 1,350 0 1,350 4040390
Accesses & Ponds 170 65 235 1539225
A-3 Projects of Opportunity3 - - - -

TOTALS 49055 65 49120 $599869915

Notes: See Schedule 8.

202

SCHEDULE 3

ACQUISITION FY 73

Level of Government: State of Delaware

Priority Category & Type Acres Estimated
of Area Land Waterl Total- Cost2

A-1 Urban Serving Areas 350 0 350 857,600

A-1 Wetland Protection
Parks and Forests 95 0 95 757,400
Wildlife Areas 1,140 0 1,140 970,700
Estuary 530 0 530 1,060,400

A-3 Implement State Program:
Parks and Forests 420 0 420 1,780,800
Wildlife Areas 1,350 0 1,350 404,390
Accesses & Ponds 170 65 235 153,225
A-3 Proojects of Opportunity 3 - - - -

TOTALS 4,055 65 4,120 5,984,515

Notes: See Schedule 8.

203

SCHEDULE 4

ACQUISITION FY 74

Level of Government: State of Delaware

Priority Category & Type Acres Estimated
of Area Land Waterl Total -Cost2
A-1 Urban Serving Areas 180 0 180 $ 405,000

A-1 Wetland Protection
Parks and Forests 95 0 95 7579400
Wildlife Areas 1,140 0 1,140 970,700
Estuary 530 0 530 1,060,400

A-2 Implement State Program:
Parks and Forests 420 0 420 1,780,800
Wildlife Areas 1,350 0 1,350 404,390
Accesses & Ponds 170 65 235 153,225
A-3 Projects of Opportunity3 - - - -

TOTALS 39885 65 3*950 $5,531,915

Notes: See Schedule 8

204

SCHEDULE 5

ACQUISITION FY 75

Level of Government: State of Delaware

Priority Category & Type Acres Estimated
of Area Land Waterl Total Cost2

A-1 Urban Serving Areas 180 0 180 4059000

A-1 Wetland Protection
Parks and Forests 95 0 95 7579400
Wildlife Areas 19140 0 1,140 9705700
Estuary 530 0 530 1,060,400

A-2 Implement State Program:
Parks and Forests 420 0 420 1,780,800
Wildlife Areas 110350 0 1,350 4045390
Accesses & Ponds 170 65 235 1533,225

A-3 Projects of Opportunity3 - - - -

TOTALS 31885 65 3,950 $5,531,915

Notes: See Schedule 8

205

SCHEDULE 6

ACQUISITION FY 76

Level of Government: State of Delaware

Priority Category & Type Acres Estimated
of Area Land Waterl Total Cost2

A-1 Urban Serving Areas 184 0 184 410,000

A-1 Wetland Protection
Parks and Forests 95 0 95 7575400
Wildlife Areas 1,147 0 110147 970S700
Estuary 531 0 531 1,060,400

A-2 Implemen 't State Program:
Parks and Forests 410 0 410 1,780,800
Wildlife Areas 1,337 0 11337 4045350
Accesses & Ponds 172 54 226 1531225
A-3 Projects of OpportunitY3 - - - -

TOTALS 3,876 54 35930 $5,536,875

Notes: See Schedule 8

206

SCHEDULE 7

ACQUISITION FY 76-80

Level of Government: State of Delaware

Priority Category & Type Acres Estimated
of Area Land Waterl Total Cost2

A-1 Urban Serving Areas 500 0 500 2,000,000

A-2 Wetland Protection
Parks & Forests 0 0 0 0
Wildlife Areas 1,400 0 1,400 600,000
Estuary 630 0 630 315,000

A-3 Implement State Program:
Parks & Forests 605 0 605 1,089,500
Wildlife Areas 3,892 0 3,892 1,167,600
Accesses & Ponds 681 252 933 612,900
A-4 Projects of Opportunity 3 - - - -

TOTALS 7,708 252 7,960 $5,785,000

Notes: See Schedule 8.

207

SCHEDULE 8

ACQUISITION FY 80-2000

Level of Government: State of Delaware

Priority Category & Type Acres Estimated
of Area Land Water Total Cost2

A-1 Urban Serving Parks 300 0 300 1,200,000

A-2 Wetland Protection
Parks & Forests 0 0 0 0
Wildlife Areas 0 0 0 0
Estuary 770 0 770 385,000

A-3 Implement State Program
Parks & Forests 1,744 0 1,744 2,092,800
Wildlife Areas 18,189 0 18,189 5,456,560
Accesses & Ponds 638 962 1,600 1,054,450
A-4 Projects of Opportunity3 - - - -

TOTALS 21,641 962 22,603 $10,198,810

NOTES: 1. Water area shown only for pond acquisition program.
2. Costs estimated in FY 70 dollars.
3. Projects of opportunity cannot be specifically identified,
however, these projects will be accelerations of the
acquisition schedule for periods 76-80 and 80-2000; i.e., a
project of opportunity in FY 71-80 will be the acquisition of a
parcel originally scheduled for a later period. The project of
opportunity category does not apply in fiscal period 1980-2000.

208

SCHEDULE 9

DEVELOPMENT FY 71

Level of Government: State of Delaware

Priority Category Ty2q of Improvement Cost

B.1 Master Planning Development Plans $ 100,000

B.2 Urban-Serving Areas Utilities 750,000
Day Use Areas 500,000
Camping 100,000
Roads, Parking, Entrances 500,000

B.3 H igh Intensity-Non-Urban Areas:
Utilities 200,000
Day Use Areas 300,000
Camping 100,000
Roads, Parking, Entrances 503,000
Wetland Improvements 50,000
Ponds, Accesses 100,000

B.4 Continuation of State Program:
Utilities 50,000
Day Use Areas 50,000
Camping -
Roads, Parking, Entrances -
Wetland Improvements 20,000
Ponds, Accesses 25,000

Total Cost $2,895,000

209

SCHEDULE 10

DEVELOPMENT FY 72

Level of Government: State of Delaware

Priority Category Type of Improvement Cost

B.1 Master Planning Development Plans $ 50,000

B.2 Urban-Serving Areas Utilities 750,000
Day Use Areas 1,250,000
Camping 500,000
Roads, Parking, Entrances 300,000

B.3 High Intensity-Non-Urban Areas:
Utilities 300,000
Day Use Areas 300,000
Camping 100,000
Roads, Parking, Entrances 50,000
Wetland Improvements 50,000
Ponds, Accesses 100,000

B.4 Continuation of State Program:
Utilities 50,000
Day Use Areas 100,000
Camping -
Roads, Parking, Entrances -
Wetland Improvements 20,000
Ponds, Accesses 25,000

Total Cost $3,945,000

210

SCHEDULE 11

DEVELOPMENT FY 73

Level of Government: State of Delaware

Priority Category Type of Improvement Cost

B.1 M aster Planning Development Plans 50,000

B.2 Urban-Serving Areas Utilities 500,000
Day Use Areas 750,000
Camping 500,000
Roads, Parking, Entrances 200,000

B.3 High Intensity-Non-Urban Areas:
Utilities 300,000
Day Use Areas 300,000
Camping 200,000
Roads, Parking, Entrances 100,000
Wetland Improvements 50,000
Ponds, Accesses 100,000

B.4 Continuation of State Program:
Utilities 100,000
Day Use Areas 100,000
Camping -
Roads, Parking, Entrances 10,000
Wetland Improvements 30,000
Ponds, Accesses 25,000

Total Cost $3,315,000

211

SCHEDULE 12

DEVELOPMENT FY 74

Level of Government: State of Delaware

Priority Category Type of Improvement Cost

B.1 Master Planning Development Plans $ 25,000

B.2 Urban-Serving Areas Utilities 200,000
Day Use Areas 750,000
Camping 500,000
Roads, Parking, Entrances 200,000

B.3 High Intensity-Non-Urban Areas:

Utilities 300,000
Day Use Areas 500,000
Camping 200,000
Roads, Parking, Entrances 100,000
Wetland Improvements 50,000
Ponds, Accesses 200,000
B.4 Continuation of State Program: Utilities 100,000
Day Use Areas 150,000
Camping 20,000
Roads, Parking, Entrances 20,000
Wetland Improvements 30,000
Ponds, Accesses 25,000

Total Cost $3,370,000

212

SCHEDULE 13

DEVELOPMENT FY 75

Level of Government: State of Delaware

Priority Category Type ofImprovement- Cost

B.1 Master Planning Development Plans 25,000

B.2 Urban-Serving Areas Utilities 200,000
Day Use Areas 750,000
Camping 750,000
B.3 High Intensity-Non Urban Areas: Roads, Parking, Entrances 200,000

Utilities 300,000
Day Use Areas 500,000
Camping 200,000
Roads, Parking, Entrances 100,000
Wetland Improvements 50,000
Ponds, Accesses 300,000

B.4 Continuation of State Program:

Utilities 100,000
Day Use Areas 150,000
Camping 20,000
Roads, Parking, Entrances 20,000
Wetland Improvements 50,000
Ponds, Accesses 100,000

Total Cost $3,815,000

213

SCHEDULE 14

DEVELOP@IENT FY 76

Level of Government: State of Delaware

Priority Category Type of Improvement Cost

B.1 Master Planning Development Plans 0

B.2 Urban-Serving Areas. Utilities 100,000
Day Use Areas 750,000
Camping 650,000
Roads, Parking, Entrances 100,000

B.3 High Intensity-Non-Urban Areas: Utilities 100,000
Day Use Areas 500,000
Camping 200,000
Roads, Parking, Entrances 100,000
Wetland Improvements 50,000
Ponds, Accesses 300,000

B.4 Continuation of State Program: Utilities 100,000
Day Use Areas 450,000
Camping 60,000
Roads, Parking, Entrances 50,000
Wetland Improvements 50,000
Ponds, Accesses 100,000

Total Cost $3,660,000

214

Schedule 15

Development 76-80

Level of Government: State of Delaware

Priority Category Type of Improvement Cost

B.1 Master Planning:

Development Plans $ 100,000

B.2 Urban-Serving Areas:

Utilities 1,000,000
Day Use Areas 1,7505000
Camping 400,000
B.3 High Intensity-Non-Urban Area: Roads, Parking, Entrances 200,000

Utilities 500,000
Day Use Areas 1,250,000
Camping 1009000
Roads, Parking, Entrances 50,000
Wetland Improvement 150,000
Ponds, Accesses 5009000

B.4 Continuation of State Program:

Utilities 1009000
Day Use Areas 450,000
Camping 1009000
Roads, Parking, Entrances 50,000
Wetland Improvements 100,000
Ponds, Accesses 200,000

Total Cost $ 7,000,000

215

AC QUISITION AND DEVELOPMENT - LOCAL GOVERNMENT

Continuing acquisition and development programs are underway by county and local
jurisdictions throughout the State. The most notable programs are being carried out in New
Castle County, however, as Kent County is only now establishing a recreation department and
Sussex County has expressed little interest in meeting recreational needs of its residents. The
lack of action in these latter areas reflect more pressing concerns including regional sewage
needs and the lack of comprehensive plans rather than a complete disregard for recreation.
Programs are also underway in many of the communities, although the earlier lack of
development aids stalled many such efforts. The following schedules outline the present and
anticipated programs at the local level. (See Schedules 16 through 21).

As shown in these schedules, the New Castle County Parks and Recreation Department,
which is responsible for the County Parks and the City of Wilmington Parks, has programmed
over $14 million during the period FY 711@76. These projects would be of considerable value in
meeting the outdoor recreation of the State's urban residents.

The other local action programs included in the schedules is that of the City of Dover, which
anticipates expenditures of $350,000 for acquisition and $250,000 for development during the
period FY 71-76. The absence of other programs does not imply a lack of local interest but
rather a lack of an established park and recreation program. On-going acquisition and
development projects can be found in a number of localities, most notably Seaford in Sussex
County and Newark in New Castle County.

Because of the limited size of the majority of the local governments in all three counties,
establishment of acquisition and development priorities would be meaningless at present.
Likewise, the New Castle County Parks Department program, while relatively extensive, does
not lend itself to a meaningful assignment of priorities. The county appears to be following a
system of land acquisition for parks to serve sub-county regions, i.e., parks of 150-200 acres in
size, however, most of the scheduled development is in the most local or neighborhood areas.
Basically the County is developing previously acquired neighborhood or community parks and
acquiring sites for future larger parks as first priorities, while providing for'master planning of
the current acquisitions to allow for future development. This approach is in line with the
State's approach and conforms with the recommended local policies.

216

SCHEDULE 16

Acquisition - FY 71-76

Level of Government: New Castle County,
Parks S Recreation Department

Anticipated Fiscal* Source
Area Designation Acres Cost Year of Funds**
Brandywine Hundred 129.5 $1,648,000- T9_7_1 C-B
New Castle Hundred 120.0 655,000 1971 C-B
St. Georges Hundred 2.00.0 241,000-
FY 1971 Sub-Total 449.5 $2,544,000

Pencader Hundred 120.0 630,000 1972 C-B
White Clay Creek Hundred 105.0 680,000 1972 C-B
Mill Creek Hundred 24.0 155,000 1972 C-B
FY 1972 Sub-Total 249.0 $1,465,000

New Castle Hundred 216.0 $1,030,000 1973 C-B
Pencader Hundred 51.0 220,000 1973 C-B
Brandywine Hundred -23.0 196,000 1973 C-B
FY 1973 Sub-Total 290.0 $1,446,000

Brandywine Hundred 35.0 $ 560,000 1974 C-B
St. Georges Hundred 60.0 120@000 1974 C-B
White Clay Creek Hundred 20.0 100,000 1974 C-B
FY 1974 Sub-Total T1_5_.0 $ 780,000

FY 1975 Sub-Total 0.0 0 1975 C-B

FY 1976 Sub-Total 0.0 0 1976 C-B

Total 1,103.5 $6,235,000

*Fiscal Year 71 includes some carryover projects from FY 70
**C-B - County Bond. Some funding may also come from State aid under
the New Castle County share of the Local Open Space Fund.

217

SCHEDULE 17

Development - FY 71-76*

Level of Government: New Castle County

Anticipated
Area Designation Cost Source of Funds

FY 1971

Banning Park $ 132,000 County Bonds
Delcastle Recreation Area 442,000 County Bonds
Green Hill Public Golf Course 10,000 County Bonds
Canby Park 189,000 County Bonds
Rockford Park 5,000 County Bonds
Brandywine Park 277,000 County Bonds
Alapocas Woods 5,000 County Bonds
Maintenance Center 5,000 County Bonds

Total $1,065,000

FY 1972

Banning Park $ 369,000 County Bonds
Canby Park 162,000 County Bonds
Rockford Park 164,000 County Bonds
Brandywine Park 64,000 County Bonds
Alapocas Woods 125,000 County Bonds
Sellers Park 76,000 County Bonds
Becks Pond 32,000 County Bonds
Brandywine Springs Park 39,000 County Bonds

Total $1,031,000

FY 1973

Delcastle Recreation Area $ 267,000 County Bonds
Rockford Park 443,000 County Bonds

Total $ 710,000

Fiscal Year 71 includes some carryover projects from FY 70.

218

SCHEDULE 17 (Continued)

Anticipated
Area Designation Cost Source of Funds

FY 1974

Harmony Brook Park $ 123,000 County Bonds
Llangallen Park 525,000 County Bonds

Total $ 648,000

FY 1975

Delcastle Recreation Area $ 501,000 County Bonds

Total $ S01,000

FY 1976

Delcastle Recreation Area 369,000 County Bonds

Total $ 369,000

Total Development Program @4,324,006-

Source: Preliminary Capital Improvement, New Castle County Department of
Parks and Recreation

219

SCHEDULE 18

MASTER PLANNING - FY 71-76*

Level of Government: New Castle County

Anticipated
Area Designation Cost Source of Funds

FY 1971

Brandywine Hundred $27,000 County
Pencader Hundred 7,000 County

TOTAL $34,000

FY 1972

Brandywine Hundred $20,000 County
St. George's Hundred 17,000 County
New Castle Hundred 10,000 County

TOTAL $47,000

FY 1973

Pencader Hundred $15,000 County
White Clay Creek Hundred 15,000 County
Mill Creek Hundred 7,000 County

TOTAL $37,000

FY 1974.

New Castle Hundred $20,000 County
Pencader Hundred 10,000 County

TOTAL $30,000

FY 1975

Brandywine Hundred $10,000 County

TOTAL $10,000

Based on a preliminary capital improvements program from the New Castle
County Parks & Recreation Department.

220

mt, we we No M no W M on!

SCHEDULE 19

Development FY 71-76

Level of Government: Wilmington

Project Fund FY @1971 FY 1972 FY 1973 FY 1974 FY 1975 FY 1976

Model Cities Program Federal $ 95,000 $ 80,000 $ 66,000 $ 66,000 $ 66,000 $ 67,000
Kruse Pool Renovations Bonds 158,000
Eden Pool Renovations Bonds 37,000
Eden Park Athletic Fields Bonds 19,000
Price Run Area Bonds 71,000
City Wide Basketball Courts Bonds 25,000 25,000 25,000
P3 Kirkwood Basketball Courts Bonds 16,000-
N@!ighborhood Development Program Bonds 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000
Landscape Development Program Bonds 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000
City Wide Park Safety Lighting Bonds 25,000
Brown Park Atheltic Field Bonds 89,000
Eden Park Pavilion Construction Bonds 32,000
Rodney Square Renovation Bonds 89,000
Price Run Athletic Field Lighting Bonds 89,000
Comfort Station Improvements Bonds 45,000 30,000 30,000
Lincoln Park Facility Lighting Bonds 89,000

TOTAL $625,000 $3169000 $315,000 $275,000 $186,000 $157,000

Source: Preliminary Capital Improvement Program for Wilmington Parks,
New Castle County Department of Parks and Recreation.

SCHEDULE 20

Acquisition - FY 71-76

Level of Government: Local, City of Dover
Area Designation Anticipated Fiscal Source of Funds
Cost Year
Lincoln Park $ 50,000 1971 Local,, State
Additional Lincoln Park Acquisition 25,000 1972 Local, State
North West Area 200,000 1973 Local, State
Tot Lots 25,000 1974 Local
Tot Lots 25,000 1975 Local
Tot Lots 25,000 1976 Local

TOTALS $350,000

SCHEDULE 21*

Development - FY 71-76

Level of Government: Local - City of Dover

Anticipated Fiscal
Area Designation Cost Year Source of Funds

Tarburton Park Tract $ 25,000 1971 Local
Lincoln Park Development 50,000 1972 Local
North West Area 25,000 1973 Local
North West 50,000 1974 Local
North West 50,000 1975 Local
North West 50,000 1976 Local

TOTALS $250,000

*'*Anticipated Program - not verified by a capital program or budget

@@ource: Planning Department, City of Dover

222

FEDERAL PROGRAMS

The only federal agency whose programs include significant outdoor recreation development
is the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife which operates the Bombay Hook and Prime Hook
National Wildlife Refuge. These two areas provide over 22,000 areas of wildlife habitat for
management purposes and for recreation use such as hunting, photography, birdwatching,
hiking, nature study, and dog trails. The primary emphases at both, however, is management
and all recreational development is a subsiclary function.

Due to funding problems, neither refuge is scheduled for substantial acquisition or
development and, hence, no capital program was available. Should funds become available the
primary emphases will be for completion of the acquisition program at Prime Hook. This
program would add some 3,500-3,800 acres to the refuge at an approximate cost of $1,000,000.

Development at both refuges, if possible, would be in accord with the master plans for these
areas as part of a $1,000,000 plan developed about 1965. Approximately $250,000 of this
program would be for Phase I which includes provision of a visitor center, observation towers,
additional nature trails, and access roads at Bombay Hook. It is possible that some of this
development could be funded in the 1974-76 period.

This acquisition and development programs of this agency are consistent with the State's
programs and would provide a valuable complement to the State facilities.

The acquisition program at Prime Hook Refuge has been recommended to the Bureau of
Outdoor Recreation for assistance under funds from the Land and Water Conservation Fund
which may be available for federal acquisitions. This plan strongly recommends support for the
necessary acquisitions.

Another federal agency has some impact on Delaware's outdoor Recreation program
although the impact may not be felt for some time. The U.S. Corps of Engineers has jurisdiction
over the Chesapeake and Delaware Canal and the 5,000 acres which surround this waterway in
Delaware. These lands are primarily for hydrologic spoils disposal, however, they will ultimately
possess recreational value. Presently, they are licensed for hunting and other passive uses and
additional uses have been suggested for portions of the area no longer being used. The Corps has
plans for recreational development at Reedy Point and, at Summit Bridge, the latter serving in
conjunction with the development of Lums Pond State Park. These plans envision picnic areas,
facilities, fishing piers, boat docks, overlooks, and trail systems. While this program may also
suffer from funding problems, the facilities envisioned would be of considerable value in helping
to meet Delaware's outdoor. recreation needs.

223

PLAN MAINTENANCE

A plan is nothing more than a coordinated, comprehensive look into the future based on the
conditions, data and trends evident at the time of its preparation. If these change over time, the
plan will no longer adequately portray the current setting for outdoor recreation and, hence,
will be of limited usefulness. Therefore, the plan should be periodically updated to reflect
progress made since the initial preparation. Each update should re-evaluate goals, objectives,
policies, and priorities in light of changes in the quantity and type of outdoor recreation
facilities demanded. The update must also reflect shifts in governmental attitudes, especially as
related to their respective responsibilities, and changes in administrative and fiscal capabilities.

It is recommended that this plan be regularly updated on a five year schedule augmented by
annual supplements reflecting the impact of acquisitions on the overall need. The responsibility
for these updates should remain with the State Planning Office as this agency is best able to
retain the comprehensive approach necessary for review of the Outdoor Recreation Plan and
other plans, reports, and studies directed at the effective guidance of development throughout
the State of Delaware.

The public must also participate. It must make known its desires regarding the quality,
quantity, character, and location of the facilities. This responsibility is paramount. Governments
and the plans they produce are intended to provide a service to the public. In the final analysis,
the citizens' responsibility requires that they make known their desires, support the plans and
programs, and preserve and protect their natural heritage. In so doing, they will prov*ide
maximum outdoor recreation for themselves and a chance for future generations to provide for
their needs in an even more urban environment.

224

APPENDICES

225

226

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations. Urban and Rural America. Government
Printing Office. Washington, D.C. 1968.

Beers, D. G. Atlas of the State of Delaware. Pomeroy and Beers. Philadelphia, 1868.

Clawson, Marion and Jack L. Knetsch. Economics of Outdoor Recreation. John Hopkins Press,
Baltimore, Maryland. 1966.

Chapin, F. Stuart, Jr. Urban Land Use Planning. Second Edition. University of Illinois Press.
Urbana, Illinois. 1965.

Citizens Advisory Committee on Environmental Quality. Community Action for Environmental
Quality. Washington, D.C. 1970.

Cole, Gerald L., Toward the Measurement of Demand for Outdoor Recreation in Philadelphia,
Washington, and Baltimore Metropolitan Region. Ph.D. -Dissertation. Department of
Agricultural Economics, Michigan State University. 1967

Cotnoir, L. J. Soils of Delaware. University of Delaware, Agricultural Experiment Station.
Newark, Delaware. 1966.

Delaware Department of Public Instruction. Archaeology in Delaware - Pupils Guide. Dover,
Delaware. 1969. Archaeology in Delaware - Teachers Guide. Dover, Delaware. 1969.

Delaware, Geological Survey. Evaluation of the Water Resources of Delaware prepared for the
Delaware State Planning Office, Newark, Delaware. 1966.

Delaware, State Planning Office. Natural Resources Inventory. Dover, Delaware. 1970.

Delaware, State Planning Office. Outdoor Recreation for Delaware - Inventory. Dover, Delaware.
1968.

Delaware, State Planning Office. Outdoor Recreation Plan. Dover, Delaware. 1966.

Delaware, State Planning Office. Preliminary Comprehensive Development Plan. Dover,
Delaware. 1967.

Delaware, State Planning Office. Shoreline Plan. Dover, Delaware. 1966.

Delaware, State Planning Office and Division of Urban Affairs University of Delaware. The
Delaware Population and Economy - A Summary Report. Newark, Delaware. 1968.

Dubos, Rene. So Human an Animal. Scribners. New York City. 1970.

Henle, Peter, "The Quiet Revolution in Leisure Time," Occupational Outlook Quarterly, U.S.
Bureau of Labor Statistics, May, 1965.

227

Interstate Water Resources Survey, State of Delaware. Dover, Delaware. 1959.

Jordan, Robert R. Columbia (Pleistocene) Sediments of Delaware. Delaware Geological Survey.
Newark, Delaware. 1964.

Leet, L. Don and Sheldon Judson. Physical Geology. Prentice-Hall Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New
Jersey. 1960.

[Viaits, Buckley. The Natural Resources of Delaware. Delaware State Soil and Water
Conservation Commission. Delaware. 1965.

McHarg, Ian L. Design with Nature. The Natural History Press: Garden City, New York. 1969.

Munroe, John A. Delaware-Localized History Series. Teachers College Press: New York. 1965.

Nebraska Game and Fish Commission, Outdoor Recreation for Nebraska. 1968.

Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission. Washington, D.C. Studies - Reports:

Report No. 1 - Public Outdoor Recreation Areas - Acreage, Use, Potential
Report No. 2 - List of Public Outdoor Recreation Areas - 1960
Report No. 3 - Wilderness and Recreation - A Report on Resources, Values, and Problems
Report No. 4 - Shoreline Recreation Resources of the Unites States
Report No. 5 - The Quality of Recreation as Evidenced by Use Satisfaction
Report No. 6 - Hunting in the United States - Its Present and Future Role
Report No. 7 - Sport Fishing - Today and Tomorrow
Report No. 10 - Water for Recreation - Value and Opportunities
Report No. 11 - Private Outdoor Recreation Facilities
Report No. 15 --Open Space Action
Report No. 16 - Land Acquisition for Outdoor Recreation - Analysis of Selected Legal
Problems
Report No. 17 - Multiple use of Land and Water Areas
Report No. 19 - National Recreation Survey
Report No. 20 - Participation in Outdoor Recreation:
Factors Affecting Demand Among American Adults
Report No. 21 - The Future of Outdoor Recreation in Metropolitan Regions of the
United States
Report No. 22 - Trends in American -Living and Outdoor Recreation
Report No. 23 - Projections to the Year 1976-2000, Economic Growth, Population,
Labor Force and Leisure and Transportation
Report No. 26 - Prospective Demand for Outdoor Recreation

Presidents Council on Recreation and Natural Beauty. From Sea to Shining Sea. Government
Printing Office. Washington, D.C., 1968.

Perloff, Harvey S. and Lowdon Wingo, Jr., "Urban Growth and the Planning of Outdoor
Recreation," in Trends in American Living and Outdoor Recreation, OR R RC Study Report 22.

Reed, H. Clay. Delaware - A History of the First State. New York. 1947.

Ritter, Pau I. Planning for Man and Motor. Pergamon Press, New York. 1964.

228

Scharf, J. Thomas. History of Delaware, 1609 - 1888. Philadelphia. 1888.

Sundstrom, R. W. and T. E. Pickett. The Availability of Ground Water in Kent County,
Delaware, with Special Reference to the Dover Area. Newark, Delaware. 1968.

Trends in Parks and Recreation, "Planning our Open Space Land Resources for the Fdture," by
Arthur A. Davies, National Conference on State Parks, Washington, D.C.; Volume 2, No. 1;
January, 1965.

Trends in Parks and Recreation, "in the Public Interest," by Michael Frome. National
Conference on State Parks, Washington, D.C., Volume 2, No. 1; January 1965.

Trends in Parks and Recreation, "Uniting for Conservation," by George Z. Hartzog, National
Conference on State Parks, Washington, D.C,, Volume 2, No. 4; October 1965.

Trends in Parks and Recreation, "The Community's Stake in Outdoor Recreation Planning," by
A. J. W. Scheffey, National Conference on State Parks, Washington, D.C., Volume 3, No: 1;
January 1966.

Trends in Parks and Recreation, "Myths and Facts About Forest Recreation, A Review of
Forest Recreation Research in the Forest Service," National Conference on State Parks,
Washington, D.C., Volume 3, No. 1; January 1966.

Trends in Parks and Recreation, "Quality in Outdoor Recreation," by J. Alan Wagar, National
Conference on State Parks, Washington, D.C,, Volume 3, No. 3; July 1966.

Trends in Parks and Recreation, "The Issue Underlying Recreation Policy , by Phillip 0. Foss,
National Conference on State Parks, Washington, D.C.; Volume 4, No. 1; January 1967.

Trends in Parks and Recreation, "Meeting Park and Recreation Needs Through
Intergovernmental Cooperation," National Conference on State Parks, Washington, D.C.,
Volume 4, No. 3; July 1967.

University of Delaware, Agricultural Experiment Station, Circular 3. Trees- Woods- Urbanization
and You. Newark, Delaware. 1966.

U.S. Department of Agriculture. Outdoor U.S.A. - Yearbook of Agriculture 1967. Washington,
D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1967.

U.S. Department of Agriculture. Soil-The Yearbook of Agriculture 1957. Washington, D.C.:
Government Printing Office, 1957.

U.S. Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers. Recreation-Civil Works Project. Washington,
D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1968.

U.S. Department of Commerce. Civil Aeronautics Administration. The Origin, Distribution, and
Airphoto Identification of U.S. Soils, Technical Development Report No. 52. Washington, D.C.
1946.

U.S. Department of Defense. Secretaries of the Air Force, Army and Navy. Land Use Planning
with Respect to Aircraft Noise. AFM 86-5 Washington, D.C. 1964.

U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare. Environmental Health Practice in
Recreational Areas. PHS No. 1195. Washington. 1966.

229

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Federal Housing Administration. Noise
Environment of Urban and Suburban Areas. Washington 1967.

U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Outdoor Recreation. Outdoor Recreation Planning
for the Handicapped. Washington, D.C., April 1967.

U.S. Department of the Interior. Bureau of Outdoor Recreation. Outdoor Recreation Space
Standards. Washington, D,C. 1967.

U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Outdoor Recreation. Trails For America.
Washington, D. C. 1966.

U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Outdoor Recreation. Trends in Outdoor Recreation.
Washington, D.C.: 1967.

U.S. Department of the Interior. Federal Water Pollution Control Administration. Delaware
Estuary Comprehensive Study. Washington, D.C., 1966.

U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, Man andNature in the
City. Washington, D.C. 1968.

U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Bureau of Sport Fisheries and
Wildlife. National Survey of Fishing and Hunting - 1965. Resource Publication 27. Washington,
D.C.: 1965.

U.S. Department of the Interior. National Park Science. Parks for America, Washington, D.C.
1964.

White House Conference on National Beauty, Proceedings. Beauty forAmerica. Government
Printing Office. Washington, D.C. 1965.

Whyte, William H. The Last Landscape. Doubleday and Company, Incorporated, Garden City,
New York. 1968.

Writers Program (W.P.A.) Delaware, A Guide to the First State. Viking Press. New York. 1938.

230

LEGAL AUTHORITY
OUTDOOR RECREATION PLANNING

STATE PLANNING OFFICE

Planning

The Delaware State Planning Office was created under Title 29, Chapter 49, Subchapter I of
the Delaware Cocle, annotated which provided for the Delaware Planning Act. (53 Delaware
Laws, Chapter 184, effective September 5, 1961.) This agency, which serves as the staff agency
for planning matters in the Executive Department, was created upon recognition that state-wide
planning:

is essential to the orderly growths and development of the State; to promote the health,
safety and general welfare of its citizens; to effectuate a balanced, integrated program for
the effective employment of the natural and other resources of the State; to anticipate
and to prepare plans for meeting problems in the areas of highways, housing, water
supply, sewage, air and water pollution, recreation, agriculture, urban and metropolitan
growth, air, water and surface transportation, education and culture, preservation of
historical sites, industrial and commercial development, traffic safety, fishing, boating,
and other matters; and to secure through planning the economical and efficient
expenditure of tax revenue.

Federal Aid

The State Planning Office also has been designated as the appropriate agency for the
administration of certain Federal assistance programs within the scope of its authority and
duties. Section 4913 of the State Planning Act accords the authority of the Planning Office to
seek and administer Federal aid of the kind provided by the Land and Water Conservation Fund
Act of 1965.

Section 4903 provides for the effectuation of a "balanced, integrated program" to include as
one of its elements plans fQr Delaware's needs with regard to recreation. Section 4913 provides
that in carrying out these provisions:

The State Planning Office, official metropolitan and regional planning agencies, official
governmental planning agencies for areas where rapid urbanization has resulted or is
expected to result from a Federal installation, towns, cities, other municipalities and
counties, may apply for, and accept and expend grants from the Federal Government and
any other public or private sources for the purposes of this chapter, and contract with
reference thereto, and enter into other contracts (including interstate compacts with
respect to planning work involving an adjoining State or States where such compacts have
been authorized by law by the adjoining State or States), and exercise all the other
powers necessary to carry out the purposes of this chapter. Added 53 Delaware Laws,
Chapter 184, effective September 5, 1961.

Land and Water Conservation Fund

On October 2, 1964 Governor Elbert Carvel designated the Director of the Delaware State
Planning Office as State Liaison Officer to serve in that capacity with the Bureau of Outdoor
Recreation for purposes of administering the Land and Water Conservation Fund. Since that
original designation, the Director of the State Planning Office has been redesignated as the
Liaison Officer by former Governor Charles L. Terry on July 16, 1968. In recognition of the
provisions of the State Planning Act and the appropriateness of the State Planning Office as the
legal organization for administering the Land and Water Conservation Fund in Delaware;
Governor Russell W. Peterson reaffirmed the designation of the Director of the State Planning
Office as State Liaison Officer with the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation on February 26, 1969.

231

OPINION OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
REGARDING AUTHORITY OF THE STATE PLANNING OFFICE
CONCERNING FEDERAL CONSERVATION FUNDS

64-078

December 16, 1964

REQUESTED BY: Mr. John A. Bivens, Jr., Director, State Plann,ing

OPINION BY: David P. Buckson, Attorney General

QUESTIONS: 1. Does the Delaware State Planning Office have the legal authority to
represent and act for the State in dealing with the Secretary of the
Interior for the purposes of the "Land and Water Conservation Fund
Act of 1965?"

2. Does the Delaware State Planning Office have the legal authority to
receive and administer Federal funds for payment of projects carried
out in accordance with the "Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of
1965?"

The answer to both questions would appear to be in the affirmative. Indeed, the legislation
which created the Delaware State Planning Office answers the instant questions in that it
appears the intent of the General Assembly was that your agency should administer federal
assistance of this very nature. 29 Delaware Code, Chapter 49, Sections 4901-4913.

The Delaware statute cited immediately above is called the "Delaware Planning Act;- it
creates the State Planning Office and delimits its powers and duties. By this statute, your agency
is accorded the authority to seek and administer federal aid of the kind provided by the Land
and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965.

The Federal Act states as one of its purposes the preservation "of such quality and quantity
of outdoor recreation resources as may be available," more specifically by "providing funds for
and authorizing' Federal assistance to the States in planning, acquisition and development of
needed land and water areas and facilities."

Similarly, the purposes of the Delaware Planning Act include the effectuation of "a
balanced, integrated program for the effective employment of the natural and other resources of
the State," such plans to include Delaware's needs with regard to "recreation," "water,". etc.
(Section 4903).

In carrying out these purposes, the Delaware Planning Act unequivocally authorizes the State
Planning Office to seek federal aid; the provisions of Section 4913 of the Act are particularly
pertinent and are as follows:

232

"The State Planning Office, official metropolitan and regional planning agencies,
official governmental planning agencies for areas where rapid urbanization has resulted
or is expected to result from a Federal installation, towns, cities, other municipalities,
and counties are authorized to apply for, and to accept and expend grants from the
Federal Government and any other public or private sources for the purposes of this
Chapter, to contract with reference thereto, and to enter into other contracts (including
interstate compacts with respect to planning work involving an adjoining State or States
where such compacts have been authorized by law by the adjoining State or States), and
to exercise all the other powers necessary to carry out the purposes of this Chapter."

Moreover, see with like effect Section 4908, which delineates the powers and duties of the
State Planning Office; Subsection (j) provides in part that the State Planning Office shall
Accept and receive, in furtherence of its function, funds, grants, and services from the federal
government or its agencies-."

From the above it seems clear that your agency can legally seek and accept the kind of
federal aid provided by the Federal Act in question. Furthermore, I think it implicit in the
above-quoted language that the State Planning Office may represent and act for the State of
Delaware in dealing with the Federal Government under this conservation bill. Note also that
the Governor's designation of your agency to act in this capacity is in conformity with the
following relevant language of Section 5 (f) of the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of
1965:

"Payments for all projects shall be made by the Secretary to the Governor of the
State or to a State official or agency designated by the Governor or by State law having
authority and responsibility to accept and to administer funds paid hereunder for
approved projects."

A, a number of other points, the Delaware Planning Act, in setting forth he planning
responsibilities of the State Planning Office, refers to cooperation and collaboration with
appropriate federal agencies (Section 4908 (a), (b), (g), (k), Section 4911). These references
tend to reinforce the conclusion that the Delaware State Planning Office is authorized to
represent and act for the State of Delaware vis-a-vis the Federal Government in the areas of its
planning function.

In view of the foregoing, I must answer the questions raised in your letter and set forth
above as follows:

(1) Yes, the Delaware State Planning Office does have the authority to represent and act for
the State in dealing with the Federal Government under the Land and Water Conservation Fund
Act of 1965.

(2) Yes, the Delaware State Planning Office also has the authority to receive and administer
Federal funds under the Land and Water Conservation of 1965.

233

c>i7

October 2., 1964

Mr. Edward C. Crafts, Director
Bureau of Outdoor Recreation
United States Department of the Interior
Washington 25, D.C.

Dear Mr. Crafts:

Thank you for your letter of September 8, 1964, and Its attachments. It
is a pleasure for this State to cooperate with the United States Government
In this very worthwhile program.

Answering your request to designate "the name of the State Agency that will
have authority to represent and act for the State In dealing with the
Secretary for purposes of this Act," it is my decision to designate the
Delaware State Planning Office to act in that capacity. Not only does the
Director of State Planning currently act.as the liaison officer for Delaware
in this regard, but that agency Is both practically and legally-appropriate
to carry out this effort.

Likewise, the Delaware State Planning Office is designated in connection
with that portion of the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act stipulation:
"Payments for all projects shall be made by the Secretary to the Governor
ofithe State or to a State Official or agency designated by the Governor..."
(n this connection it is noted that the State Planning Office advises me
regarding all acquisition of State property and prepares for my consideration
and adoption the Six Year Capital Improvement Program for the State.

The State Planning Office will provide for you the additional information
required In connection with Attachment A and B to your letter of September 8,
1964'.

It. is gratifying for us to participate in this important effort to conserve
and utilize our Statel.s and Nation's natural resources.

Sincerely yours,

Elbert N. Carvel
Governor

234

17,XIKC I T-rt v xDmi-AH-rmENT

CHAULF.8 1,.TItHHY, OR. n"V Ir H

July 16, 1968

Dear Mr. Handley:

On October 2, 1964, Governor Carvel designated the Director of
the Delaware State Planning Office as State Liaison Officer to serve in that
capacity with the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation for purposes of the Land and
Water Conservation Fund.

I hereby affirm the above designation. The State Liaison Officer
is currently Mr. Rudolph F. Jass, Director of the State Planning Office.

I have authorized the State Liaison Officer to appoint a deputy and
to assign to this individual the title of Deputy State Liaison Officer. The deputy
'would assume the full authority of the State Liaison Officer in his absence.
Mr. David R. Keifer, currently the Technical Director of the State Planning
Office would be appointed Deputy State Liaison Officer.

The State of Delaware has received many benefits through the Land
and Water Conservation Fund. I trust that this situation will continue in the
future.

Si ely,

Charles L. Terry, Jr.
Governor

Mr. Rolland B. Handley
Regional Director
Bureau of Outdoor Recreation
128 North Broad Street
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
CLT/raw 235

RUSSEEL W. PETEHBON

February 26, 1969

Mr. Rolland B. Handley
Regional Director
Bureau of Outdoor Recreation
128 North Broad Street
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

Dear Mr. Handley:

I hereby reaffirm the designation of Mr. Rudolph F. Jass, Director of the
Delaware State Planning Office, as State Liaison Officer with the Bureau
of Outdoor Recreation for purposes of the Land and Water Conservation Fund.

Mr. Jass was originally designated by my predecessor, Governor Terry.

I would also request that Mr. David R. Keifer, a member of the Planning
Department staff, be designated as Deputy State Liaison Officer.

Sincerely,

Russell W. Peterson
G over nor

CP:nf

236

E2cEc1u,rx"viEr Dm:iPAiR-rmy_rw-r

RUSSEEE W. PETERSON
00VEIRWOR July 8, 1970

Mr. Rolland B. Handley
Regional Director
Bureau of Outdoor Recreation
U. S. Department of the Interior
1421 Cherry Street
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19102

Dear Mr. Handley:

I wish to notify you that Mr. David R. Keifer will
become the Director of the Delaware State Planning Office
effective August 1, 1970, following the resignation of
Mt. Rudolph F. Jass. I hereby designate,effective August 1,
1970, David R. Keifer as State Liaison officer with the Bureau
of Outdoor Recreation for purposes of the Land and Water
Conservation Fund.

I also am designating the Director of the State
Planning Office to receive-all reimbursements under the Land
and Water Conservation Fund for land acquisition, development
projects, and outdoor recreation planning. In this connection,
it is noted that the State Planning office advises me regarding
all property acquisitions, administers State funds for acqui-
sition projects, and prepares the Six-Year Capital improvements
Program. The State Planning office is both practically and
legally appropriate to carry out the State's requirements under
the Land and Water Conservation Fund.

Sincerely,

Russell W. Peterson
Governor

237

238

DELAWARE STATE PLANNING OFFICE

State Planning Office personnel who assisted in the
preparation of the Delaware State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan

David R. Keifer, Director

David S. Hugg I 11, Planner I I I

M. Kenneth Bessinger, Planner I

John C. Williams, Planner I

Cora Bonniwell, Magnetic Keyboard Operator 11

Jayes E. Denney, Chief Draftsman

William F. Flemming, Draftsman I I I

239

,
11 11 I,@,_ 11, @@ 11-- ,. "'I @ @_', t t- I11", @I,I I"I
I @- ,i -,;-,," " "@,_ ,,,@_ ,@7,@,,- .", -, "l,,@,_,I
.1@". @1, ,j,@,@,r @_, -, P1,."';,"',@ ,- I- ,I, @I.I-11,1,-@@ @ @
1@I-,--i" ,,@;", -, ", @, :@ @@@;@,, ,,:@",, 0 N,,,@@',,-i@ @','N, @], ;@IIII-.
I11 ti,r@.:@@--- @.@:, @'_@ @' , ,,,@I
"" ,,_I@ " "-,1 ,@, .@ I
""_"@, """i" ,,, - I -, @'@@ I @, - "` " , -- ,@,@I1, @ I@
''_@,,@@'?::@@,@,@%@:@ ln,@,@-,,,,,-, ,,;@@-@@,@ @, @I @ @@ : @ I @ , 1@ 1; @ ,, , " I 1,@% ,,,, I , -1 I I 1@ I @, , , I -.,@
,I- ,@, i "- ;; , -1 I, - , ,,-1,,, "@ .- -- "I I @11 @ -,1-1.@I ,@..I ..I.I
- @- !@ @@ @@@-I ,, "" @ @ @ ,,,,,II
I...i@,I II ,,, I.@ ,@I.@I,, ,,, II
,@- , -"- "-"I @, -,:, l, ,,, @ ,'r I II @ "iII @i-I
@._, I@ I-1 o II'll,-II*;, -11 @ ,,, ,V@-,:--_ @, - ,.@@,I
- ;@ 11 " i@ @,,,-@ @ ,I" @, I@I
@"11 11 . @@ , -,@@ ,,,,:, ", ", @',@I
- I@11, I @ _,@ @- - "@ 1'.@- 11 _@ I I,@,I@ 11 - I-. I@
.
, @,,@ @ 11. ,II ,,;:f @,, ,,,@@ ,. oI-@@ ,I.'- @@@@@,,@,@."@II@I*
Ii:,@ @,I@01` @ 1, I 1-1 _@'A,,'-'@, -, , , "" _I @, ,11I,,,,I@II .I.I@@I
@,II@@ ",1-,1, -1 - I I,@I, I, I I, ,@,,@I--- - @,@_I@II
-,I,J II "--z, , @,@ -, " "', @ @,@ @ " @., - l,,,`". ,'@ ,; I,w@
II,:","I11:,I@,,@ , ,@@@,@@-,II.
III-II,@I,",,,- ", " @ " -, ., , ",.@,I.1@I
,,@ @-_,---,-,@--.. ,@,' ,@ I ,-II
:,,,,,-,,@I-11 , I-V v I @,@,,- 't ", , ll@,@,,r-@,I@@I
, -,-@,-@,",1,@ , ,_:,,@,-,@
@--,-, @-,@I II-I,,@,,,, @, @ `;,v ,-,,-i,,@,_1,.I,
"1. ., - @, 11 @, , "' I , @ ,I, , @ , , , " ,." -, I@"1'111'_ l. - _I II II II,@., ,,
,t@_ I @,_ Itil" @@_ @ -" @ ',@ @@_;,@',,,,: ," _; : " @ @_ "I',I-, @ -, --7,1Ii@,@-@I@., _I
-1 I ",@,II@11I
I-@@,,.- I't,,, , @,,@, , @, I@ tI III @.1,` I I- 1,-@@, @@,, ,@ @' ,, @,,", , -,, Z"@,,I1.
,@I I-I,-,@I11, o @
I " .,,, ;@,,-.
I-.@, 11 11 I 1, -.I- -, @ ,- .. @, @',l @' , @ - ". " ", @`-@, , @' ei ,. ,, ,@. @, 1, ,II@t ".I@,
- ,i, @,,-,,,,,,,,-,,,,
@-I .@ ". , -,,I@.'@ ,I
I,-I,,,", -, ,-@ _,,@i)L - ,@_",,@ ,@,.,,, 11,I@III..
";"-,,, " @,I , "', ,@@,@@. ,, , ,,,@,@,i'll, -, !"@ , _@_,:,;@,@ii:' 'I, , I ,I i l" . ,, @;I, ,, ,- @,
,-,, "--@ ,A@@, @, - -', @@', @@7@@"0_@_11III.@
@I-- , --1 @Ii@,` @,l1,--I,'--l "i @ ,,,"-1.I
w@ , " "@, -@, @,@i@, .", ,, X- -p , J@"_., , 4 @'i, @ -,I@
I,1,II,,,,,@- @ , ,'@@ @,j@@ ,i.@,@' " - @@:-;,@, @ I "'.1 , ,,,,-I,III
"., , - , ,1@1v@@, 111'i@, 1@
@"I ";, , ",v- @I "I ,,, @, @"-.@,,@I,.
--1 - ,@ ," ,", - '' ,@@,11 ""'.-@@ @ I-@@-I-1 .1I.@@ .-II.
,@-,,I ,11 -- 1V,-@
'' @,,@ j,"; ", @,-@ ,@, ?: c"Y, I, @. __, I'. -11, , @ @`, , @ @ ,t 3, , " , ,@,7, "', _@ ,
,@.
, ,@ '. 1", 1@ z,- 1@ 11 -'_"" @ _1@ q @ ,,@,- @ , ; @ ,;., " @ I " --, "',,-@@ ,, ;,@,-'), So ,@.,, @ @,, "@@@-@! ,,
@
.,,"",,II
I ,"',,,,,",,:@,"@'t,, 1.,, @"';`t@'@@, @,,,@ ;
,e,@,, -i,@,@@' II,;,@@@-, , ,@,@ . 4,"I" _'@1, IT, @ @@ @11,@,`,@@ n,,,,:2, @ ,,,@I
,,,i ,"',,,," - @4,'If,-@ @ @ ",r, 't@@,v,111@ I V, I.I@I
,,@@ -@ ,1 @,@e I,,I,.
,@ -II@11@@ II
-,, ,I,,, @,.-IL 2, 1@"TI, @, ii"!, ` @'I.I,-
-1,-I I'lI
" , I "I @ @ , , ,@ @,@ ,@,, 1@_I : , @ ,I , ,,,,,@-I,,
iw .,tl.,;@w . , ""O" , " @ 11, 41 ,,;,, ,,,@.: @,"I ,@
,-,,'. -,' -'_,@@_@,-,,"",,,- n -,J@ .%@Z,- X""[email protected],
,,_@, -@@,,@,, ,;@, n,,
_-- ",16- ", ",,,,,@"I11,
,,,, 11@1--A ,o@ II@11",o,@Yr@@,, ,pc@@@-'MP-q,@,@@- 11_1- 11, @ @-` .,@ 1,I
, 'A" l,@,lo", - , ,, I ,@,I
- @I I1, , @ " -, @,_,, @ @@# @ I -, ,,- ,-, l", I 'I g @ @ @@ ','@ @ @I"-,"., @'@@,'@","-,v @- _., @l ... @, @,",,@@-
'. I @ ", -@ , I ',1z , @,,r" ,@,
,. ", @,,II -,@
,@@@ ,@,-" @"@1."@, @." , - ,", ,,,,,,,,,11 11,,,
,- ,," , " -;,,ki, @-.@ I@,_'o@, ",,.,I. ,@
,," ,"', @ ,,i .1 " , ,,,,, "', , I , 't, @j- ,, @,oqi @iv _1'1@ t @,,I !I- K @@ix J,44 -, ",,,@@_g
-,@@5q,?""_,-",#@' ,@4',,,@A4@
-,`@,"@-"'"-@-,,@ - ,
h, "t @@?_
z.-1; 'I","., .,,@I
11-I,,"- ,--
I",'-,@_V " @ @"- I -,,!S-, @,I.,f,. I, ,,, -I 11 @Al I I I k, ill " , , v , !@ I @-W - @ f1, ,@, ,,4, -_':,i@_"-,"@@,@, ,,@@,I
@ @-I,,,@ - V'J,",,_@_ i . @ @ I@ , ,4, :Z T,-I
, ,
,@@ , I@ ,f,, ..@ 1i ,, " ,@......,.,- ,,, V I T, @.' 19 @,,,@ 44@ -, @,, -i,vAq .@ ,,,,,,-,"'I
_,__ _'i "'@ V"@,f,,,
"@ ",k-@ , -i@ , @, I @ @,, 1@I-I,cs"II
-@,,@,,, " @@ ,, ,11 ,@I@@,,4 " i_"I7, ,II ;@.1 -1 I @1'1,,@@III-I
11 , , ,__ ll -1 , ,I, IL,,,,- ,'@ ,@,@ , ,@, _,@@,,@i" , I" @@'-_@- , ,.@ ,@,,,,
':,- -. _,'@ I l. ` I i-@,, @ ,_ - , ,@ 5-4k,"MI @i, I 1,1,@, iI11 ,@___,.@ ,@_
,@- "@ @, "'
@",,@,'-,P,W@i,@i @ .lfl@" @,i 1@ -,@ , -,,-- ,,,,@.I-
I. I,, ,, ': @ -@ -@.,I"I,,@, i, @,i @ -, -, ",n @,,, , ,,,, ,,,,@
Ir@- -g,--- ." -, p@,,,p,I@@4,i-,,@@
@,,P- I,@ ,,, q.- ,,,II
@@ , @I ,-- 1@," @ , I 1,@, "4 , @ 't,'I'Al,,'11,@I .I @@I11I@@
@, .@; @ ,@ ,, ";@ f,';@ ........ -@",,:,,@ @ F "@ i@rzl @', @1, 11,1_1 I @ @,@@',@ @ i ., @, - ,,
,- @ "N , _," 11 V @ @ [email protected]@ I'i, ,, . - ,"',,I' @ , ,@, I II@III
@ i,@@4' ,-@ ,;@,I -,@ ,_I@1, - v1@, ;, I,- .1, @,@,@, @,,.@III
, @ @,,,,I,i" f 'j, @ t ",,,A,-@@ IlI @
IIlkII I, ," ,,, @i , .4 MIA;' "14 ; @, c @,@', IF' , %--,@-", I11 @ @II
,@,,,@, ,@-,,_, , , "-, @ , "I I 1,II
,E I @ 'I ", 's @@,1-1 ., ', ", - - ; "",-@, @@,@,@, !@@,
1, 1, 11 @,@4@1@-@I", -,iZ, I, "ZU"r @,-"lk@l, 1,@,-,@ @@ " @ ,I@ ,,I 1@, I ,@I
II- @ ,l,@, ,I-
-1_1-1 I ,-P@@,@@ '7 @1' I I i' 0, !", , ,@ @@,, ,,, ` @ "-.-@, @@
-If ",,'i , ,, J&," @ -_ @.I"II
I'll -'1@1' @"-@,@ ,@,, @-, 'I,' @ ; .4 ! @ Im" @yi@ @, -,, .,,@@ -1 @;, @01@,, ,@I I
@,.,,@, 11II, @II " @ I- , @,,, ,?"' , @4, 1, - _12, 1@'il @ @_@ ,@,.
, J, ,,,,, i,,
--IY@I" ", , @ @ @',,@@-,,@,," -@,
," ",,@,,@,,,@@__@.
,," @@i I@ @Vl @l@,i ",@;',, "'7@ ,-@ @.,@ -; j ,
,_ ,,i @@ 1'@` , i" @ 11 @ q,@_- @,,,@1: , ,
, i @ CZ4@ ;,@ @ e',' i @,,"- @ , f,M ,I"@',,",I,,
,I-I, ', @ ,,,,@,% --4@,,a-@,,@ -,'@ ?i ,@ -, ,,z .@ ,@- ; " , , 3I- @- ,@t " @ @@@
,--"@,", ,-,'.@, ,@@'j -v 'iI@,","- @@II@I
.',;@ -1:@, I I @ @@* @l, '@i' " 4@---il @ --1, .@ ,11 -,,,,,,1,,11 @11 -III I@
,,, - @ " "', , , , @ ,'@ , 14 'f, ,@' " ,, @l,@ j, ,,- @,7 - -@ ,,,@II
, ,@
@@-, - I , @'. " -'@ v I I @p; 4f, ,@" ,,@ ,;@ _.@,I
@@,,
@,, t_ I 1 - i'l ,@',,@'y 1@ V, ," , , -1,",@, @,l,"
,,, @i @ , " I , I-,,@7 , @_,: ,I@ @@,,, I", @ ,@
"@I11 - ,I--,I
@@, " ,@'.,, @; 4@@l V, ,,," ', 1,,V,@v@N"",i, i,I-@,@A @ ,-, , "---I,
,, , Z, i, ,,,, @ @E 1@1-@@11,, -',@`@ '. - ".,,@; - x @' @,_I, @'Z,' _i@'i`@@,@4,, _@ 11---
,@@,,@@ -",",('T@,_ @ ,"N @,!,, t,@ @A?,p@ , "", , ., , %, 4,@,,III
-@@11 - -, ,,i, 3&j@,,!,C@,@! "t-,@,I, . , @,-,@ ,@ 11 " pl .,@ @,,-
,@- k, 't",, -, ,@v, , @K42, ,_ @,i ,'4, @, I, I'llI,-@,",
,,, ,@, ,",, ,; ", It ,@ @> i ,'I -,",@: ,@@, _@-),I, ,@@ ,@*-,
@, ,I, I, @ @,;v-) @- @ p ; "II@
@@_@ @- - " j', ,"@ @@i_ ", ",@J,@-- ,I,
@- I ,"i ",1'11@ I,,,@Vlla,@ "" ,@,_ ,, "_11@@ @ I I",I@
",nl,j1'@ @-Q 'i @i, ,@ "-'I - ,,,,-,,I@
_; `,i, ,@@ I'll. , @ ", @,M,",@
-,-@, , ,,, II11 .," I - 1, @ @ - 1, c.1I @@ I, , k@,, ,II
,-@@ @ I, .
%@ glig%U@ @ , -@ ,1@jl@t@4
@H", "@@ 1111@ ,@,_- @,,-I-I@,,,@@,--,
" N i ,Y, - @A ,@, @f@,4 @,, @ @ j@ @ , ,,, @@',@"
,@
,@,i@_. ,@i , , , ,,-@l ,,,I Il'al JVIOV A;, ""m", P, "NMI _x
" ,_,", ,7 _ , ,Q-1, ,, --,@
,@ K ,@ @,,,@@ ,, ', @, @-l * ,, !,@ ",e" '11""'l ,,,,, w@, ,@@
, ,"; -il , -@,,@ " ,,X'@g,. I@j @ , q'p @ -@U A; ,@, ,' _.j 1, , ,, "-,I-: , - I7,,@'
.,I @_ , I,', @- V,,, 4e ,@,@ l@,, 1@'@:@t@@,@e,",,@,@,I11 @
, :!1.1,V11,, @-M @@ " ,@-,, i", ,,,.
I@@ " - @,@,;,-,,,, @@ ,I i, @ -, @` A ,I@N@. i'l ", , ,-1,@,,-
,,,
,@ ,Z,, Z, @@, _@ T " '@' @4 4i @ _--,@ iN @, 4e"@ @. , I M , v -If ."I",IIII
@@ , @@@@ .1 I I v, . @ -I @1, .@@v "-g f @@ , i, il - @$ J@ @ ,@ -,,@ ,,, @ , I,-,, @,
@@I,i@ ", @@@, li, " @, I @",,-I -1 'It i'l `@i I *1 , @ " x , ,,5 zII , ;, ,@, . z,@;,,@'* , ,@..I
1o4;" !@ 5,., @ ,II11-@
@, ", * :-1 r,i, -,e,@, `@--i @@',,'j" Li@,(,,jl 6, w_6f
,I@t 41- 1@
, @, @, ,,@ @@ ,j,"i " -- @ 6- I r@_,% e @t -,,@
,,, , @'I , ,;I ,-t w,,@;!@@!@,, @, Al @@i_-,@,.q.@;,,,"-,@,@l@@-Ij-,I,@,P.@_I,fl"T.R@p .-@X_,!@kl;"- @@,;. @ @,1@1,@,1 ,
@4@,, -sA ,,@,,,4,@,v i,@j! i , ,; y --1- 1, @,T-IX""', , M ",, ,@i1
*@1@4,.@I,,@' ,@irF @, 1, 11 I@
,@,,1 i4l, 1 41@,Wfij"U!41 A, 01;q'R, '@',@@1,9,i , , @ 9, " V,749 ",,@,,.II@
, ,,,, ,@ ;@,-J@7-1@ j, ,@1' 1, ,@ , @ ,i", I,
_, @", ,,,@i_'- ,-. @ , ,.II
, ,@,@11, ,i@@,, " - , - @,,@ i@ ,, ,l@, ,@,% @,,@, ,
; ," @@ ,," @@
"', @..I@@ i@, @ @, i, '- V, @ 1 ,@ k - - i i ,-4 - @, I F, @,vi i , If- ; @z 'i @', @ ,-, , -@'. ',- ','--@' 11-"-
,I _;,, , " @,, ,I- I @ -1 @1, , U, @, , ", I I .,@'A A -I,' @ - ,-, -', , @'- , @@ @,@,
@ iI ,II" @@,, i, , , , @ @ ,-,I,I -l@
i, @@,'.,@I I.-, ,-Ill ,,, I , , , ". ,, @, @ @,, ,. ,@ , @,@ -
i@@1," ,i @,"@i , @ @ 1 @ , , " @,e 1 ,@ 1, 1@ "o. 1,1_l@ @,, % , - , _@- @-,, ,@-@ @ ;@, @,@,'i,I, .",-I
", _ -,,@_-'@ I- - , i -, @., -, - @ - ,,@',1- "I --,,, -,@ , . @, ,I
--@11. j@@,-;@,,J' U, ;? @, @@ @@ @- , ,@,, @@ @ @@_
@li ,,@,,@@ , >,44@"'A l@*, e"` " @,@@,,,II
@, @@-@IIIIII@
,@, II@ ,. 11 ;I ,@I.I
,
,
I -1-11- " -@,_11I.,, @ @i"-"-111- --4- 1-1- 1,,,@,-I 1@,@ ,I,,@@
, 11 @@, ,4 4,@; @ e@;, ',11); @,,' ,e , " 1, @-", @,@,,, ,@ @ , ,I1,-I,1,I
,,-1 @. @ @.,, , @ , , I- I, - i'Y x @ , ,"It I @ , I 11 , _@-I,_ l @ , , '-; @@I-"",, ,,, ,,11 @ @_@ ,- @1, @1, ,I1;1Il- , ,, , , - @@1'1 ",_I@I_,I
I_, I ",@@ ", ,,
,@,,,i@I I@', ,InII
I I I-@". 1 ,@"i
- 1,,-- @ @,' , , ,. , @ ,", ,i,@1,:I@@, -,. I,,,,--- -"@ ;@,..I.
@
"I I:__ ", :", _,@:, " i @,',@;, , ;, @' ,,@, - @,.....,II,@@ - @II"" 7,@@
": " ""o @, , , 4 @, , - @', I " @@ I 1@ " 1'@ .,@ e, ,@_I@@ ... @,, I@ , @ !,,@'! ,i@,,@I III11 , @ ,I I @, ,I_@ I,@ %@ II,. .
,, -, - @ l. @ ,-, ,@-,- II
I.II ,- 1,-@ ,,, 'm ",,1, ,.1V - , ,,,,,",I@ -,-II",,. , I,,
,@,p @, I ,,@,..
-,@ @`, " , -,,,"
"I @` @ - I @--@
@, @-,", l"111 ",Ig@, 1iII
,I-,;I-
e,"1, c , , ""j" -, ", @, " -.@,
,,-11---,`1;,-4, `,%OS@,k @ @ 11" @_'-1,11 a -11, @,@I
I'll", -i - __ifll.,Z_@_@,@@f@@,k@"W
-_ ,_U@W,-@.@,,
@-,,N-11r."@,@U- 1-.,Iq.
-I I,,': @I ,@,,11,1,@, ;@-M,R,@-,,,
I,,,,,,@ 51", @@o,,,in, @jj@, , , , "-- -I, ,@@ ,@@.
f, 1i11 @@,i, ,@-,Z:@@"44, ,-'p`,@, , , ,@ ; , , - ".I,, I@
11 -,Ili , 11`1@@ ,@@,,,.@@
.IIII"--":"",7 -,,, --
,-- ,-I, ,,, I- ,_l , : -, Ii,-:,III @
I , ,- ?@, @ @, ,@-Nj@ , @'S_@ , @., @ ft " , , ,
1. z , ,,-@ ,-, ': ",@@. ,@@,'! , ,@@' , ,@ @,4,N"j4.1,;,-P - I @ 0 ,@@ . - @ @ , -, '- --@,,@, II " "", , @"-. -: @ @,, @,@"@@ @_ I I@ ,i. , .I I,
@ -i"i ,: - ,_-,I
@ 11 11.1i -1 -, 11 I@I,@@ @,;@ @ 41 f,u,@ ,, I ,, 'k, 1, , @ ,", , , 'i @ @'17.@,@ 'I, @, , ,-Y,-
1@ I"@-, ,* - @ @ ,@ @, @ " i,, @- _-`,I '1@ @ Il -vv",
A@@ , ;,@!' @ 1@1,@@,@@ @I@ @,11I, @, "@:@I.11
@I_- @ ," _@ 1-i@11 ,-, 1, ,"i , @ .1-,,-..
"I I ! I, I @I @ ,, , , ", @% , ;@,, , 1. @ @ @ ,,, -, : II", i , ,-I I-@,,I
"'
I@, I "_,, , i @-,@ @ @,!,,,,"_-,@ ,@,@ ......,;I
t -", ---@` .- 11, I- ,Eti ',@,:, , , ,I
@ " -@ , " ,,, '',\. -_,_
I", @1, -; i, ,,,@ I ,,_`,@' ---, , 7, @@. II ,I
1, _,@11-11'1,9 @r 'A ,@Ei@!
I-,NI
"I,- "I @--- -4,,@@!@@,'-,@"- - ,j@'_111.lll @ --, @'.'@%'-', @ I",I
@11`l- I "I"-
-,i, ___"@_@ 'T, I ll@I
,1. @,,I ,I IIe",I@ ,, " , ,ki, , , " @, , @ "'I , ,@'. @ @ , @ 17,,al ,h;-?.,.- @,7:7-7@,, - @@@, @i,: t" , ,-, , ,I
, I@ ,"i @ @7 " ,,, , - , , "', , @@,I,,k' @ 111@ 4 @ I I I@,"I.@
"- ,,KiL,III II
i,@ " -,I
I@,@@,,@. @-, @, , , ,- @ I", @ j-'6@-,,, - 1, , ', ; " ,,,, @@,,', -t 1'.',411 ,
, @@1, I, ,,,,I ," @, V@@ I@,@, ,@: , ll I @* , @,@-
I I:, ,@ ',',-,@. @@ ,,,"I I "r@'. .- @ ,@ g " ,,", 'IN @,;@,:, - ," @ ,t;@M I `_@ ,
.-, , l:,@,, 'k ,@@,I @" @ - - ,,4i ; @ I I ,@," , @ q I, @ j , @, , 4,"@, _@,@ ,, , - i...@- @, ,'@ "@-- ,@ '.
,,, t,t @,@-'@@'@%f,l. ,,`II I-,,I
@@ ""-,",-,"1- ",
,,, ,@ @,," @,,, @ -, ,@,%@ , ; - @,-@@ @;@, ,, ,1,, I @A,, -@,,i@, ,,,:, "",I
I-,:,@, @,,,@"-@fx,@ @,@,'iI@ I@I-11 1-il- "N"',,, ,@ ,@,@@.
@," " 7: ,@ " ,, , @,,- ,_,_ ',@ @ WUM ,,,,-@ @I `@ ,@ I @,@,,,@ , ,. '@ I, I @-I "I ,
,,, - " , ", , , @' @, , , ",
, @:, @, -I - I., I, ', " _, @ 1- @ @, , g q , 1, -i " 'x ,@ " I ;_ IZ N, " @ P @ @ I I, @ ,@@"@"--@ I@ -- '."@I I",7-I.
. ,,,",, ,,.@ @@@,, @ ,, @ ,"I"',,i @ , @ ,-;@ 'i @ I'- @ " , @ , @ @@ I" , @, v I I @, I I it, f, i , ,Z-; -, @@@@.:, ,@I
@"I,,@:;"', ,-, -I-, , , I ,@ , ,,@ ,, ,@@ , 11 `@_ U:,,-,- ,", @,', -2-k-7-III@;11:-,@-,
11 @11 , "-l,I,, . ,,, , @@ "@, i@l I I- ,I, ,,'i,I,- ., IZ, ,, ,
,-,i,-
,,:,,"111@ @ ,,,,,_@@ , ,,,-I"": . @,'01,,, ,,'@,, , Ti i,,, .,
,@,-"sI'' "@,",11
1 ,, @ ,,@@@
._z",-I,-,@,A -I@,,@A' ;e,@ii@,@@',@'@,-,,@@,",-@@@@K,'@'-@,@,--,--,-.i&@@@@,,@,zl@:-,S,i"""@@ @ I-@l i,@@@ _@ --',_@@I
"'i@"@i @ , 1 ,-I@4,- ,& @ a`ij,,@ ,,@t @3@,@ @6'4,@ ,'i, , i?: @ t, ; 1@:I
,I ,, -@ , - "-I
@ A,, 11-@,'@ -, @ "', %@,@ , @,@,', -,,,i "', @@ @@I@.@@, I I" - F, @ @11, O ` I @ I -,,,--
, @,@, , 1,.@' @ ,' @,@,'7f@I-Z". @ , ,@@,I
.-,@,"I t ,@,,_,@I
," @ 1 @@',' , @ @' `@ -, @,@' @@ I ,@, @ i@ 1.,`,@,,@,1V4, "X- -@ 10@' _u ',s@-, -,III -
-_I@ l@ l,,,vff',-iI_I" @@11 -aWnfu , 5",,'@p, @1,,,1:@ l@'-",? p"', f. @
,,,,, ,, , -@ @ , - l,@II -," ,@,@ I.@
I@,,,I-,,;@V,- I - ,__ -;@4_i,@@, .gNl@@,@@,a,@@e ,1',_' If- ,,@ I
I-I-,_@ ; ZUJ,@ -@, " @@@i - ", I@ ,I_,
,,@@ 4 " -. -@ 1, I.
_@@ "@@ . ", " @,,_ @_ , ,Z,l @-,@ "@,@ ',, i O' " @ V4 3,@ ,@ .I
@ ", ni_@_,,-.
"I_- --1-1-,--@111 -111 __ -1,@-@ , @,,, ,I@,
M, @ @ Z""'t _`, @ - @,-,@`,I,I,,-'. ''@-
,", @I,.
-I.11 @, .11,II11
-11 II-", I @11 1, , IN %;, -f, @ , " i-.,-, 1@ "-," @, %,,@ I "@I_C@II@.@
,@@ @'r'1:9- @@ 11 I"-I I"11 1,IIli
,
@, ,@@ , @ " A ,'@ , -@ i @,, ',.", ", I@" ,q,@,,@,, -,p@-4'1@,,@'@@,-@1''4,t""-,@.;@v@@@"l'i L11 11 @,',1_111 ". ,"I,@ :@_'@l : @, @ _- (p,4,@ I" ; @1@.@, 1@1.,,@-.
,
, _-@- , - , ,., A,@@l; _,@ @ ,,m,@@1, qr ?k , @t3,I @@,@-, "I @,- @, i @ @, -
,,@ @@r -@ @1. . . . . .,,@,, @ ",I"I@
,I -,@l-.- -, 11 @, @,-, __'@I@,,@-11- I I .'@'- @" _-@,
,I'_ 1117, -" ,@, , , @,,'-, @ @ @, "; ." - , @,
-, , -11 I @11 i-I @'ek 1, , ",O-,-,.
@11 I I@l @, _@! I,"`-, @' , @ ,,-'@ ,@,-I:III
,@ ,,`@ ,@ @@,N,',,,,,',,A@,@,,,"@,,@,",'@,,@, @-I ,_-J, , Z, -,--,,,-:
I @- I_I", @1, @, ,,@,
@ ,"@,@ ", _@ *1- `."@ A-,i@ig, , " @,III ..II I @III -
"I ik,,h, ,,t_@@4 @i 4 @ @ , , , ,@ l, I t _- - , I @, I ,-1-
.,,_ @ ,kMj@",---;, _', -_,-," @',Qj'@, ,@,_ 1,-" i@ , @@ -, ,,-: @ z ,.I -@
I @i. _@,,@,-, ;,I, I',, @, ,.11
,@"I
-,,-, , A, @ @ , ,, I-c , ,, @ @I I
,*,_V!'-'T, 11 `., "' -, ,@, 1, ,',, ,, V@ "@ii , @1, .` @,,@, ,,,_
,
I,@_-5.@, "@ * !@ , -, ,@-L,Lq@@44421@@ ,", @@ ,@_I@I
" e"i_-,,@,@',,@ I, 4@ @_ -@-@'?',@-@,,,t@@@,@",,"f-,'@@,,@@",@l, ,,,@@,-_ 11--,,", j@,3 -,-N11,,I
,@ , , , " ,,,@ -, I ,i, R,@I@@,-1"1, ,,,,,
@', ,,,- , "'@ "i,- @",
,,,I@- 1141,11.1'@_-@-,-,;.@!, ,'',-1.@I
,, ,I lia,, ,@, @@ 1 , ,, " @ ", 7lI@ @@ I,. ,,-I.
:III I V@I
@, ,, ",I I I @@,.@ @@, -,I @- ?-''--.`,,,- mc@ R, @ I "'i , @,-1"-
III1, @ 11, ,.@ @11 --@, ,i@A, @, III.;_@i11 ", -,I
I 1. Xl.,@t .""., - ,,,-"@,_`@I/I @@I.
,, ', ", " @'T@ , @,-,,, , ,,@t,I 1_1@
-,e.;, @ " , @ ,,, @: "Li @ @@'
, , ,,, -Y @, :,@, l @ ',`,@ ,@ ,,,, @
,11 I D, ", , , " ,,, @, @,,,,@@ [ po,@,@@.I
,
, ,,I@Iij_ @`11 1.1,,-, @,@@;I,,i @,Y@i,@@ -@ @, ,@,`I
I ".,I
I ,@11 I, , ""', 6@ "',j,@ , i -, , @, -,@,@ " _%, @ @ @@, , --1,,I
, @, @_ ,", I-, @ ,
,
II'I-"I' @111.@11_1"A,!,',@@Ivt'@,i,@,k @ @'-,@@r".@i-""@',@,,@,-@,;,,,@j-,,@@@,,0,,-11I1@1 @@, 11
,,, ,
,
'.@@-A@@@' I",-,@--@I
,, ,
,, ill@, - ", _%&4 @ g ti., @ @- @ @;',@,-, ,@ @ ,, @,J, @@_,@@@ @,-,@ '' , ,"v
@ ""I@'j, q,@@Ii,,@,, , l-,@f@,@,I1, -1 @,,Ili 1, 11, 11"@I
,"_ __ _,@I
@@, ,,@,-,- -, @,,I @
",,,"Mt@', "I-@Ii' @ I,i, -1
" I 11 ",, @ .,;,@i , , " @ , ;4 I Av@' ,", IX , , I , , 1@ ,I,- @ @@; ., j @ !@_ " @, " A @ @, 1---,',@ @ " @ - ." F,I
" @ , ", @ '..,,@ ': -, ",@ , " @ @@ "I--II- I,II,,
, @, 4@ @ @- @@I,-I@ -@-@
I---@.@.@@,@ 1@ 11
-@ ,"i,@II.
@,@II,:, "L@ @ -@ _k,@,Z,,,j@,:,p,@@-;-' @, _ - @j.0...@.
J, !@I@@tI,, ,-@, I II@@"II
I -I@ @@ I,
, I,,---, " ,,@, ,:@,,, ,,,,,,- 1,, @4,",@, ,@,,:,@ ..,1, -4go@,,,,,.,@I
, ", ,: ,:,@ @ , ,,,@ ,,,,, , @,',I- -
I., @f", - ,,, -0,0- - 1@ --1111-- . .. ... @@, ,@ " ,,,, @,*, @@, @, @ ,,,.@ @, 1, @@I,l .1I@@
-I,@I"@ ,_,.11--,I
,t- @, , @,, l@ "I - ", ," ", -i @,,-@ w ,'-,, - A.Zr"@,,"@, " @ - --,t,,-1), -, ,__.-I.1
,I_-..@'QA @-- , ", @, ,i"I@@_,@" - -I,@.7
"
oi ,@@ ,f_,@,;1-Ai,,...",
@, " -, @ @, ,,@, " -@ '.. , -,!, , , ,,, - .j" ,,, i 11, , "i 11,@,.,r@,z @ ,4@ @,,,,@,
@I @11@11-1-,@-@ ,@ ',,,i@t,@',,'@4-',@@l,,@@4s@,,,@@@@-,,4,, ,@@A-'@ -@,, I I,@,
@I I ,, ",,@ " - @, I I I", @, @ ", I ,,@ j , @,- , . ",I,q11 , @-, 1,I11 11I@- @ .,
I@@ III @-,I I 1,,I@@
I,,,,,, I1@, i'@ ,,I .e-1.@I,[email protected]
11II,;, f,,,. ,k . "@ , " .f, @ t @ " , , "@@ - 1, @'_@ ,," "p, @@--j 5, II -, II--II-
II-`,@ @,' @" @, ,@,, @, i@I@ @. b,III
. I@',,"" , @ ;, -, I,@; ,,@-It,-@
I@:@ , " I"", @, _ _ -"@, @@',@,,II-., I I
, ,@'. " ,, "" I",,,
'4@, , `1 i @ , , I,i. @... .... -1 ,, '.i,@ @i_ l, @,-, ;,,, "4,-,
-, , , 1@ I" -1 il ,l , I, ,@-
,, ,,,iI
@@", 'I,,;@@9,,I @",@@ I -@''I,@:@i11.
.,:,.,,,"", _,__,,,--;_@,,,I---",,,-II
11 I",,I"1, "-,,,I ,@, , @ @ @" , " " l @:_,, _@ @ , ,,, @, ,,l,%, @ @,@', -11 , @., - @@,,I-I@@--@-
11111,@_, I. 11 ""'j,", 1@,'__@, ,@@.@,@,,@,,@",4@,@""@@,-""@c:"@ , ,, -,,11 11,@@
I F,@- I I % "I" -, , @ - , ,, "@3,@ @- , - " ,@ - "',, I-,,I-"I,III
", " , -,1,1'@ @, ,Z @, " ,L_,_,,- ,,-@@,- I ` @` i5o
, I ," @,,'@,@ca@d-,04, @@I-I-I@
I@@-,,'@@@,L""@,,@@,,,,-',i,@,,@",i,."', 4" 1,@,!7'@,'f",-4 f@,-o".7-I-@,@ , @ @.,;@ , @e, @ -" @"1@:,@.I.
,;@, @.,,@, @,' @,,@ @* gnl, - , , @ @, @ ,@,,-@',,-.A,@',,4,@@,t4,-,_,@ -j- -@' ` ,, ,@ 1,-@
@ @ @, @ , , I ,"', @'., " @ A,@,,@,._ ",i1 's" ," - p", , , " @@lv __ '4@ip,@@,Tt`i 1, @N',, @I @ @ "T ,l; @@-@ @. ,II
-, @ ', ,i@, , , @, " @,@,,- "' V I I I @ '11'x - ,v, ,-,," @@ ,I --, @, ,.,, ,,,-,,,@@
,", @,@ @,_ ,@-__ _,__', , '"i"'i"',,t' ,-- r'. ,, ",,,
I, @@ i, ,, ,,
11--,II-11 @,:"@ , , ,N@,' ,j @ ,-,i,@@ ,
,,-''.,'I, , - '' @ " -. -,I-,,,,@:I
@- @- -- .","
,I ,@ `;`@f " "' "' LAWN NO OI@,-I
@I@-@-j@' ,",@ %@, '@ @!, ",_ ,,I"II
@; ;,@, 't _ ,,-,@', , ,,,,,, ,,@- ,6--f-I@
,,@,_', "; -@ , @,',@ -@,10'@,,K,1,-F&-i@
1, , -P,E@A',WAR@ @@Tj@,:K'.@O,, 1, ,@ F, CE.'',II@I
I, ,,I _@ "I 11 -, , '' - , - -_ , , @@,@@
@1, I i"I,`14@, ,,, ",_ ". . -, @@@, 16,@ ", " , -,_, i@s,, @" @ I'll 'i k, 2-,I,
J, I, ,- @,,.-,;,,,@---1,4@-,_
@ 1, U, _,",i -1 ,v@@I,I
- ,,, @,- @- ,.-, @ 33 @, ,,,@',"p @-' "@, 4wdfAAS,CO11MVSV1tv1M%o "II, ,I,
'' @ ,'@,,, "' ,,-_ " ,; , ;@ --;@ ,,@_ . ,4,@, -, , -, , - , _,@ : @ @. :
-@-,@,,@ , ,- i III nt,
@,1@ I -I@@- ,@,@, "",", I ,@- _ ,@-
""., @ ", "_,,
I @'',,--, @,@II ,.
@ l, @:1, I I@, I- , !'@ " @3 @, , "",
I,@,,-11 I,',, -, ,@@--@@ ,DOVER OELAWARE 19901,111II .
11 ,, II , " @, ", @@ , -@_ -,,
- "I-,"@,' , ,-,, , -,@ I -,-----@ , ",:, i, :, ': ,- -i,,I-I-
,1, ,,,,-,@',-,Z_@@,,@, -@,@", @,:o,,4"-@;@-_-@ @,@ "l, 1@ ,@_@ jo ,'@@ I-,, l,- @,,-,@_,@..
11,,@-,, _,,@",,I,, ";,",
;, ",,- ,,I@
-1, 11,1'@@,-, _1 _111@@,,,I
,Z@;, ,@ , I @@@,---"@,@,,i,@@.,,,I@,,@,,,,',@-@";"-@",I,
I@_@@,@, @@,I "I ,z r""@'@ @ ,__, _, @II-II.I.
,,1"d,",- 1@_ I'.."i..11@@I @@,-I
,@,,,,;,@,i, @@Ii , ,, @,II@- ,@'-_,@,@-, @,i ,,
, ,,,--,@@ ,@ @. @-;_I, ,,I@
,@@, .@, @@[email protected] -, u,,6 , " @:I,
.
@@@,II @. @
ll, @11 ,.@, , -, @,@,, ",, ,I i,_ I I1, , I@ , I i__ 1;@, 1@ ''I@@,@,@[email protected]
I ,,, t" --@-,--, , @ II 1@',,., , , -_I-,",-,-@@`- @,.-1,1.
,@__-, i, ,,, -- , @I,
i",.,@, 7@1@@ ,@, , , ""I,
ll,I-I, ., ", ...,
@,__ , _lI@@.
@@A@,, -, ,@I, I, ,,, @, " ,@,,,,@
,,, -@4"@@-`@ 11- 't,,@-",i@i@.'@,,,@,,@-,,@@'@",,,@@,'@,,,,v@r',@,@@,@@1"4, , ,,@-@j,,,@,_@,l@@ - - -I-,
,- __ _@ ,@ @, 'j, , -
,4 , ,,, ,@ , - - @ @,@ %,,,,, @*_@@, ,@ ,I:2,,,@_@I@,.@
,,,, @1@,@,,-@@, & - , Jo, @ ! @ I ,,, I - ,,'@, 1, I ,@,,@,,
Ii @.,@ ,I @? ", ,, @ @@
I I@I I, ,@@"' @ : " @,,' " ", @- .' " i , , , " -,-" ",,@`, 4 " "@'@-,,I@II
,,q , -@um, 1, ,,, , - .,,'t4-",,,@oA, @vt-- I-- .@, @`, j,", ,,@ k, .,,,@@ ",
, 1-' -@ -,@ @ @, ,,, "I - , _,@, , -f ,, ". " , ,, .4, 1@i.,I-- , , ",,II
-,- @ l , " j , ,,, I 11@i,- @@ ,@@,I
" "',I@,@_,_ ", @@i,A_ @, -@, @@
_.""'l, @, -,,@ . ,I I 1'@ 1, _'@ I -1 I 1, , I ,,, @, @", @, ,", @ _' l,-- ",,,f ,,@,, 7" -, , - @, , , '. @ - II
,I ,,'' "_", "-@--@' @' @@' @ I1". ._@-,@@@,I
-, , "
, ," , 4,",-,@!,,-'5@,.A@-., ,4@@4,,!,,f@@@",ko,g@,@,@@@@,e"f',
,,@,,"[email protected].
I-',@,,,,@, -?""I" @@@" , , " - 4 I l", 3' ,, @ A I - "',',@;,I ,,_5"4z;@,@,@,-. , ",@_@,,@,', ,@@ V, _.,_-@- , - ,,,,,. -II
- _, , ,,,,, @@"--"I _ -,,, 'T - - ` z;' t@, "L , @1 - -,1_ ,
,, ,@@ 'i@@ " , ''@-i , ",II 111 11--11@-
I -,W@11'11-@11, ," - ,i,;_,@,J,.'@,' " _,.,@._i,, @, ,:,-,,,@,',N@@I11 "I 1@1 "II
I'll --@: ,@"j',11 ,. jil,@_',@@,@@j',@,a ,@-_ ,,, 11, I1, 1,
1 @114 ,,,,,,,, 1@1,%, - w vi 1;1 @",.'-,J_,@_,@ l,_"@,IxVlg',-11@04 -'ft-@,-'@4@,. I---- , _ - -, v--
,- -, ,, & , -".,-, @ @rl,",j-@"@III
I_ ,", --,-, -, , ,,,,@ @,,,. "; @ , , . " i -'@,_,, I @, @_-I
@l'i"',"', "I.:,- 1i @ " , ,,, @ L@,' @ @ - , '?-,''
11 11,"," @, , @, , ," 1,@7'@`@@- ,i , ,,, W, - ,@, - -1 I,,
,@ - _-k,@',,-@,--_,,--'- "" , ,
',@,11_11'1@ _@ ,,,,,, ,,, , ,W @@i " , ,,, - , @ , , . g, t , 4,"-1_1 ." 1,
@ @ , A@@ P" @@
-1, , x, @ @, , @" @ @ ,,@ .'-- @,@I't'.,, -,,, @i ". , 1@, , , -Q@ @ IlM zzlli $I.',!,, , _4 , i @@,1_1111 @. -@_tf:@@, @-I-
,,,@, ,:@: 1,,,.,,, @ ,@,, 11, ,@:, , @, @, , " :,,I,@
,_'I`,1-111 -1_--- --,,@@-, p,,
I@'- ,'.`@,@@ @f,!@@,,,@'@@"45-,-@@-__@-, -11 @")'@@,@,'4-_-,,,'---@ -,,_N,@- ,,il @, @, - ':"I@II
I-I I@,@ @ -,,1. -, -@ @@ --III
"" @,;,I I l, , I- I_@, @ , @ ; @- , - ; " , i'-, _ -, ,@@
-I.1 @_ 11 I , 1-1,@,'. ,,,, ,,- - , , ,,, , "'il",,I-II
,I,;@@,11 1.,@-@,p@,-,@, _ii@ , I'll 11 -@, @ 1, @,@ i ., il.,, -@,- " @@ t " ", " ,, , " , " @, , -I
,,,,'@,@@',",,,@, @,,v',@ "', :@ , I@III",I@
@, ,@,@, @@ @,,Jv@", vl@llivi@1@111!@,,
.1, _j , ,@'@, @%,,@,,Il,,'@,@,-!F,."@,@,,@'@. I @",,,",@3,-@l,-,,.@";"k@,@', I'l"@@,--,""""i'? "',I" ,- [email protected] .11I
,- I I,, @-' A"i ''s,I-,,,, ,,,,@
@II I I@,@,_'-,-A R,T@' , I&@@, 4@js 1@ - A, ,,, 1, , -@,
,U- @-@ f ".-"--, ;1I'lI
,@,,.,@@,@,@.@',,,,,@@,,@@,li@@@,,@",@7, @@-.O@,, @@,@g-,@,`Pj%',-4*,I,-,, , .,@.@
9w@ @@ i, ,-@ ff @ @, '_-,I
@ I- ,@, @ -@A@" - ,,4,"'T i, @@ ... @ -,.,_@ I @@ ,,,
,,'@ I @-- I@
4r ,@ @,,V,,,, "" - i,`, '-',@@,
II1@@ 1, @@ @@ @,,-,'@@,'.'@,-,,,, - , ,- _ ,
,Pj1,,'TpqRf---,,g-h1, , ,,,,, ,- I, , ,,@
, , , ,, I ,,, ,,
I"1,I- -1- '- @, - , , j- , " "-,@, @Ii_-III
@-,ll@ -, @ @., 1I , , , "@@,II-I
11 '@ ... @ "'-@ @ " , @, @ ,,,, @,@,- - _-"%W,@,@-- , __ @,, , .,, _:, ,,,, 1.I
"I ,, @, 11., @U- @,,@-k,,";@4@,.-,@,.A4 @w, @,, q?,.:@ @-P`4 @,r,;__ ,@'t'w_ *, ,@-1 '.II
-", @, -,I@z @, -1 @ 4'. x -@,, r"I, ,II@@II
-1@ , : ,@,.@ @ I , ,`,,@,, :_J, , U ',4' - -,ig, " @@4 4 @ ,@,@,@ 4 @, @,' @, " I , ", , , ,I I-- @M ,@ " - ," "- ,I@I @I
@ ,, ,; @@l , ", -,'@,. ,,@,I,@-"@-', , ,,@ ,,@, ;@,I @ " @ ,,,.- , "'." ,@, , , ,_ ,-:_@11 -Il @`,.-.@ ;,-,@- ,
@' -, " @ @ - "pl, @ , " ",@ @ ,I rill @I
@ .
I" ,@I@ '4 ,,,,,, ,@ - @,q, ,i "I, `A_@Ifl@vz__, @r'-@Ivlll,X@_
I-@@@ I@,w ", .;,,71 .... .. @,,,,@,," 4",M__ _i'lI-11,-
",@@".t,- @,; I , -'@,`,. ,";, - ,4, g @ @-',@@' I -
"- ,, @'- m@ I @, ,; @, , I--- @@I
,, ,, --
'iWO", @4,
_*@,il", , , "",1:I
,*1 4* 4- ,'-4j.@-`t-l ,l,--,.-,,@ I
! ,@@,@ "".".;,@@,,',k@,@,@,@@@@@,,@,@@,@@@@,-)@A@@@,@@,@,@@,@-P ", "'i `@.' , .,@- "' @,@_@,@;@. @,-@,zl-@III
,,A@- - ,f W_ ,.@,.@-,@,@ r@f_@, '@' @,@ @ " @, ,- @', , @@ @.@
@ "`@:@, I@`,, - , ,@ i,l, , ,,
"" @. ,- - @, iz, @@ @ -@, @,, " @,,@, @@@@ , ,
@`, V.,,_iv_",,*@,k.4, q-@I.,I
@!:@@ ! @,@ 7 ,,-! @- @,- ,@,W,,@,@I@I
@,_ ,;, " @, _e " @-- @-@@, ,4,,@ 'i", @@ @,@,@@, - @t "'@4 s @@ @ @,, @,,, , -@
, @.,`@,-@@ -, @@ ",, ", I --@," @@',@,,"@@ " If'U,-@@ 'i.,"", I @ 1,@@, ,- ,,,
,@, I " ,,
IL", "@@ ", ", "i ", .l@U @@ " M.,T, @ @ ''te, @ @ @ ., I,@11 ,":",-II@._,--
-,-,U_@,,'-@,--,@--il,,@ , "II11 - ,-1-5 -Z,@,,, --I@
IA @,@ "i", , ", - , -1 -S @-@,
I- ,@,2 --@,7, @', _ @, le k@,,- -M, 'A @@ "I,RAR. ,#@ql,j@l ,;," V @ ,,, @, I @, 4-@, -,,, @-, ,,_@-I
@ _,,,I, _,@'1_411 __ @," -'I"ft@'U'K 0,-_,@ @:! ,-,
I., 1,,, I: @,;,;l; @ @ @ I, @ ,Y@ @ "@; - "- ., - -,,-@_.IIII
, @,@@- ... --,l@"@ @,- ,@,@,-@,@, "-V11,,,1,@,-1, @,,-@,@
,,,@,IIII
@1. 1, 11-,@;@ "-@@l@-@-., 1!&,,--,, ''" @ ", ,,, @ "u" I,i@l ',,-,,, -@,, 1; ,, ,-@-II
", 11 -- -@ -, I"_,-
,,@:_"",, !@ _ ,,,-,,-,".",";@@-@.&-,,',,@,@'!"@@@,i,III
'. l- ,, e@, @ -, , ,, @ , -,
- ,,, @ ": @ III @,,,,,,,4 't i ,,@ @,-- L ,.@ ,_.@,II
I.", 11 ,,@ 1,@14 @,, ,:@-,i@@,'@":@",',@-,-@,,@,',,', :", @i I@,@ ,@- ,- @,I_-,II@z I ,_IiIII
I@-,@"" , ,,@@', @, ,I@ @; -'. ",-I " @,@ ,-1_11;@Y'_ lt__,"@!, ,__1 _-II,
,II
II- , , I . I , -',,,",. I I,@@ 1@ - "@II
, ,. @ 'I", -, -,--, - @ @,', @ ,-, , -,;,-@&, _@'@ @'-,@,@,@ @ @,j "'', " @ 11"'i 'Ifxo, 1',@,.K@ ',4 , ,- @ -@,,@@ `@'@,@@' @4 @-'@@' @@,@ , I - @,:,I,@ , 1,
", _, , ""' @-' @*'it,: @ , "`@'@,@,f-, @,I ,, " -,,, "'i ", , @k?,' @ ;S ,- , -,II@@1, , . ,,II
@ ,@, -, @ I@ @ ,-,@ I@,@
I @,,@ :, @, @'. : @, i,�, --_ ,,@ @,,- ,,,,.
",III--.,,;I -@@ -, f, : @: :,-,I-1-I
",, @- _t,4_iL@@, I- 1,11@ 1@ ",:I- k, o-@,-iw@4,, I@ "', , ,@ 7, " @ 1. @ @, , ", 1, _@, @ -, I, ,@.I I. @
'@ @_ ,ql- " o@ '',,""," 1, @11.11 ,,@- __ , -,4ir@l@@11,@,@- " @I
"' , ,,,-.11 @ , @@ ", ,-@,@@@
@,,,,,, __ ,,@ , r @, ,@11-_t', ,., 7, ", @ ,,- , . I-,I.II
",,
,@- ,,- I11 I 11 , ---,,, k1,", ,I,.-@- I.- 11 I-- ''I --@,,@I
,:1'1'1@f, - @@,@, ,',@ , @ " - @ ", ", I---, , , ", 1. ,,@ . Nk - -1. 1@@.
@", q,*., , , , I,- ,t'---@-,-.i @,,@k@ii,jl,l, -@-,
- @@11,,,
,, " i: l@ @, @ @ , ,,,,,, ,4 , ,, ,-'I'llII ."I , .@,,,--@I
II- ,1" 4,1"7"@@,w@ 11_i@, 1,i,@,;, 1, 'nkII tI 11 ", ,1;", ", :__-I,II
1 ,.1_",@- ,,@,,@,3_ I@ , -_,@ ". @,@ @'. - @,,e
,
I1,,Il,-_1--, _- 11,@, --,,,A;,@ ,,,,,,@,&,@,@,,,,WC@j,,aI @. i -4,
"T-- ''-
-", ,,@ -
-T@ z,-- ,;,
-,7"' @@r@,@;@@', ;-"@@`"@z,.
@,",A",,@ @ , , ,,, ,@ 1@ "I I---' @, I I_
@,_ @,@- @--,@,,@a-,@,@;@@"'!"'@",.,t@- -5' " @i' It @ , , @` -.
I_,@ I i @ " @; , ,@ 1@,! @i, " _,@-,@",@,,@-,, ,---, "-@ ,,','@,",-.-
, @@".@-@ ,"'! ,, i4 @, ` , 2, 7 ,@,', ", I- ,_'j, ,@ 4 ,III-I- @I1,II II
@"@ ,,@,@- " ,@-l "_,_@ !"", @@__": 11@I@ ; ,@@',@,,@I,
",-, q @ j '@ 1 @@4_ ,, ,,@ , , , - : , --' ", @@';,, @ ,,-".1II"I -,,
:, i@,,,..,
;1 @,-,, @ - @ 4r, @ @`@ " , I z , ,,,@@@,A,z @ @@,'-, Alw, "VI , -,,, 1,
,;,! I@ "' ,, 11I"I-p-'..,@,,I-
,,, -l,'; @`; @ -, J!@@ " @,:" -,f @,:@,I
II,,, , ,, @,,@@,@,i, "t --, ,II@@ 11 @ ,,, i @,@@, ,:" ,,@ @ , @ ,..,
,@@ ,v-11- 1@1 F,"i"",I,I,,,
I I,, @,@,, , g44@, , 4@@jn@@' @ ,-
,Nl 11_@,,@',@ -@'@,- ,.I-V @ I 1-1 11 -,,,., @ I I T "-@,,1, "I @,,", "i,@@@,@ , e , 1,@.-, , ,, --@ ,II @
@,z("'.11, I 11-11@- - ,,,,, 7,afl,@--`,@.,,@'!'@,@I,,_ ", __ , ,,@', @-,-I
I11 @ ,,@%@4,,i,,, @11@
-, @ , - 7@ ,,,,,,, @,,@,,. 4@ "'I, , , ", "N" , ; , -1@ 1, - ,- ----g,,,,@, ,,@, ,
I,.1 @@@ill ,@ @, @-."I, @,,@'.,I@, 1 ". @
-@@ @ ` @ , @', I , - ,",,ap @-,@ i, i, 2 " 7 ,,"i..,@, ,'@; l,-I
@,,- ,, ,,,-,-iP@,@,@E-O-,[email protected]@@@'ll@'ll, -,- 1 q"', ,-,@,;,,I@
,-@"@@'i,,W,@@4,@ - __-A,I
I, I I I - I1,",@ -3" ,@I@,@ , , L", aI"', "_.@ ,_ ,, ,@-.-
4, i , ig
II,@,,@; - , ,6 I I,@ @@I,-"'. - I, I , ,,.
1 114@1P,, @ F @@gx - @ , @, @, , ,@ ,,, I I ,@, I'P , @4"rI- @
"" n.@ I 11 ",,% - I11@, @@ @@ @,,@,, @ 7, @ @ , - 't @ .@ -I .
T@' @i - ,I, -, @, o"i @ ,11@1 11 li, N$g @,@ ,'k, ,_@. ,@@ ,m @ 'n I-@111 11@-
Pq.;-
,
"
@v , -
0@
@

;'"I -@C&1,1- @-'U-@,,,, -1, " @ ", -AI, i11@I
,@ @`4"I'M , ,@ WF o, E14"'! Aq .-@,@ "t, - ", ,I ;,,",,"!,@`-.
,,,I q 12 ,14AX - " ,,,,, ,,,
"'RUA,,,@_, ,,;@ ,"- - -.
,-1, 'K w-. __., @A@, @, ,,11"
,q i LA,@i@""-
W"I,
@11 ""If- 1@1,, ",I"I f@,
,v @@ '[email protected]`11_ ItW,@@fg@, ""-@',I-@,-;,,@@,,@ -, ,,i, @ @ ,,,@,z,
'-,g_@-,4I@- ,_ ", @:@ @ @ @ @,,,@@ @ ,, @@,,, ,,, , @, ";
--I,";@ -,',,' @ l,@@, I ",,!,h, %,"M 4,M#V#f @_ -1",
, 1@,@ , _@,, , @', - "n y -7%;i4,.@_@@ 'iIII@ @ ,
,- l, ,,,, "1, -, -I_@ @,@',@,sT.)41kj@'R"@,' -,,@-I, ,",
@ @k rf'@!@Z@, @ ,,?,'M@,,11@ @ ,011-111"", @, @@ @
:I ,",.@,@@ I_ 1.I"I,,---@----',,
I". ".I- -:@,@@",,,-,@, "--I @'- @@ - "t---,@@,,@ ,@
II@ ,_ ,", ,_ - @,@ -Ii @,@.L@@Ilw,i -4 , @'@' ':," ",e ,-@,-@ ,,,-,1,
Ii @ , @ @ " >, "_ @1' i, - 1, I I i, ` @_
I@,, ,@ ,.__,@2*"' _j,M, Atdu 1145 '4@ @ ",,@ @ "i
1, @ -@,@,@, ", . 1,@ @,,'@ r@
@@, "I,I,@, -I, -, @i@@4,,@i';g, - . -',' mM,.-_1','1 @',
@, " ,
, _@ _ -'a, ,@ -,,I
D, __, ,- "I', , fi,'@
.:: @@, , @ , I iI ,-,, @-,-, ,C@ " @ "a _1 ...r;;i -: @-,,,;,, i,@,@@., ,@l: -'@- 1,@-,,r:@@ .II
@i' II, I 11 @ ,,,
@l, @@ @ @",I@ "@_-', "i "M,@,It@,P Y '-' "I
,11 1111-111 @,,,@111--
@. I @, I -@ --@'.,u ,@ --U- @@'o ..", I F,--@-.
-__I"1:@.@,@y":i@,,,,,@,,,,@@,,@i,@'j, , -@- 'i,,,
,-@ ,@--"-J?@,,@,_',@@,,AI,,I -
,@- ,4@ @, 1,i-@,@,,,@,@@ , -
,@@2@I - , I., -,I'll, 111811111 , ",e",.,@p"; @',i@,'-@@-@@,, ;@ 1@,, @ , @'I,I@
,;@,II11111111 1, "";" b'. A
VA_,,
'_ " -,,i, -j@, " -, -,"
@ ,@ : i@.@ " L 1@ I-'`
,, ,, ; "'Si"', i,, ""-
I : @_@@t,, ".@ @ @i I,
@, [email protected], , I-,
-@
@",411 n I 13 6668 00002 904@@,-@,@@@',,",,,:.-',',@,,','.'@,"' ' " '.@
,%,,@ l, @@,@
" , @ ,,;,,
I @ , @5 ,5,,l"I, -- -,I_ tl,46@j ,,- " .@,II
@kI@@ "t@-, ,,,,I, -@,,, i,,,@ ,
, I," Y @,,,
"
.I
l
,
-i-I ,, iU "14,,T, 4,@-@,@,@'4,@@t,,,,@-@1,6t,@@@@,@@@,,@-@,,,@,,,@4e -"a,@,,,@,,i@@@@-'c',,,@,@@@,f,@,,@,,,, ,v!, '! " @ " @,@
1, @ @,@,, ,t,@-I@111t@@_Iell.11`2l.&4 - , '111"i U, .,